Partnership and Harmonisation TWG

8 February 2010, 2.30p.m.

Annotated Agenda

 

1.       Introductory remarks and welcome to new members

 

Topics for substantive discussion (3 items, approximately 25 minutes each)

 

2.       TWG Annual Workplan

The draft workplan is attached as Annex One and is presented for discussion. Any comments received before the meeting can be taken into account in order to expedite the approval process.

 

Actions required: TWG members are requested to either submit comments in advance (to chhieng.yanara@crdb.gov.kh) or else to comment during the meeting before finalising.

 

3.       Aid Effectiveness JMIs

Education, Mine Action and Agriculture & Water TWGs have been requested to brief TWG members on the status, achievements and challenges of their respective aid effectiveness JMIs. This is intended to promote further discussion about how a sector-focus has ensured that aid effectiveness activities are relevant and focused on results-based activities.

 

Actions required: In addition to the 3 briefings, all other TWG members are invited to share their own experience and recommendations for further action - across all sectors.

The AE JMIs can be downloaded from http://www.cdc-crdb.gov.kh/cdc/gdcc/default.htm (14th meeting of GDCC, April 2009)

 

4.       Aid Effectiveness Report 2010 Concept Note

CRDB will prepare the 2010 Aid Effectiveness Report for the June CDCF meeting. The Concept Note is attached as Annex Two for discussion.

 

Actions required: TWG members are invited to share their comments and inputs either before (to chhieng.yanara@crdb.gov.kh) or at the meeting.

 

--------------------

 

Topics for briefing & updates (2 items, approximately 10-15 minutes each)

 

5.       Data issues

a)    Data validation (especially for 2009-2013) on aid flows by development partners is required by March 10th (as per email from CRDB Secretary General, dated October 2nd 2009). This will provide the data for the analytical section of the AER 2010, as well as provide input to the Evaluation of the Paris Declaration.

b)    The Mission Database is now operational and on-line (access via the ODA Database home-page). The ODA Database manual has been up-dated and training was offered in the last quarter to development partner data focal points. Development partners are encouraged to use this system for their own mission/study coordination as well as for recording information that will be required for the Paris Declaration monitoring survey in early 2011.

c)    Paris Declaration baseline as discussed at the September 2009 P+H TWG meeting, data is required on 2010 projections in order to calculate indicators 3 (aid on budget) and 7 (predictability). Development partners are thanked for their cooperation the baselines are presented at Annex Three.

 

Note: The ODA Database Manual can be accessed http://www.cdc-crdb.gov.kh/database/index.htm

6.       Briefing on the Evaluation of the Paris Declaration (phase II)

During 2010, Cambodia will participate in the Phase II Global Evaluation of the Paris Declaration. The overall purpose of this Evaluation is to provide information about the development results achieved as a result of increased aid effectiveness practices. The Evaluation will consider three core questions:

 

1.   What are the important factors that have affected the relevance and implementation of the Paris Declaration and its potential effects on aid effectiveness and development results? (The Paris Declaration in context)

 

2.   To what extent, and how, has the implementation of the Paris Declaration led to an improvement in the efficiency of aid delivery, the management and use of aid and better partnerships? (Process and intermediate outcomes)

 

3.   Has the implementation of Paris Declaration strengthened the contribution of aid to sustainable development results? How? (Development outcomes).

 

CRDB has posted relevant information on its website, which will be updated regularly:

http://www.cdc-crdb.gov.kh/evaluation/index.htm

Information on the global exercise is available from:

 

http://www.oecd.org/document/60/0,3343,en_21571361_34047972_38242748_1_1_1_1,00.html

 

Actions required: Members of the Evaluation Team (RBMG from Canada and VBNK from Cambodia) will be present to make a brief introduction and to answer questions.

 

P+H TWG members are also invited to observe the meeting of the National Reference Group (which manages the Evaluation exercise) which will take place at CDC immediately after the TWG meeting.

 

 

7.       Any other Business

a)  NSDP Update MoP is invited to brief the group on the incorporation of P+H TWG comments into the NSDP Update

b)   Selection of P+H TWG co-facilitator

c)  Progress Report on JMI implementation and a new format for the JMIs All TWGs will be requested to report on JMI and aid effectiveness activities prior to the next GDCC meeting, as well as to have formulated a new JMI. Following the "Managing for Results" training for RGC and development partners that was provided in November 2009, the JMI format will be revised to improve its quality and partnership-based features. A meeting of TWG Chairs will be organised in mid-February to consult on this new format but comments are sought by email (to chhieng.yanara@crdb.gov.kh) on the first draft (Annex Four) so that the format can be finalised as part of an inclusive and participatory process. (All P+H TWG members are invited to share this document within their respective agencies for wide consultation).

 


 

Annex One

Partnership and Harmonisation Technical Working Group

2010 Annual Work Plan (Draft 26 January 2010)

Aid effectiveness objective

P&H TWG Activity (1)

Responsible parties

Output indicator

Timing

To provide a forum for establishing consensus on aid effectiveness priorities, consistent with H-A-R Action Plan, Paris Declaration and AAA  - P&H TWG ToR para IV(a)

Produce Aid Effectiveness Report with policy recommendations(CDCF June 2010)

Discuss AER Concept Note and provide inputs to draft AER

 

Provide data for analytical chapter of AER

All TWG members

 

All DPs

 

Feb 2010 (CN)

April 2010 (Draft AER)

10 March 2010 (data)

Promote use of country systems

Comment on analytical mapping work on use of country systems and develop into operation plan for implementation

sub-group of P+H TWG

 

Analytical work produced (sponsored by SIDA on behalf of EU)

1st half 2010

Identify and define revised aid effectiveness priorities

Based on 2010 AER and CDCF3 dialogue, provide inputs to a new framework to replace H-A-R Action Plan 2006-2010

All P+H TWG members

(CRDB to draft)

Revised / renewed H-A-R Action Plan

Q4 2010

To provide recommendations on the formulation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of aid effectiveness initiatives - P&H TWG ToR para IV(b)

Link aid effectiveness work to results-based monitoring at sector level

Reformulate JMI matrix for all TWGs (to provide clearer results chains, link aid effectiveness activity to core work and ensure mutual accountability (as discussed at 2009 RBM training)

P+H TWG

CRDB

All TWG Chair/Lead DP

JMI matrix revised

End-April (GDCC)

Assess link between aid effectiveness policy, behaviour change and development results

Conduct Evaluation of PD Evaluation (global case study)

Discuss draft

NRG

All P+H TWG

PD Evaluation study produced

End-April 2010

Preparation for Paris Declaration survey

Extract baselines from ODA Database (Q4 2009)

Dialogue on questionnaire

CRDB (DP to enter data)

All P+H TWG

Baseline data shared with P+H TWG

National survey launch meeting / dialogue

Data by end-2009

End-2010

To promote information exchange and peer learning - P&H TWG ToR para IV(c)

Promote the implementation of AAA and national aid coordination policies

To provide a forum to discuss progress and share sector level experience of implementation (especially sector level results and capacity-focused work), including with NGOs

RGC P+H focal points

All P+H TWG members

 

Ministries and P+H TWG NGO representatives share experience for wider discussion

 

Each TWG meeting

Strengthen integration between central planning, budgeting and aid management processes

P+H TWG to act as discussion forum and opportunity for information sharing (together with PFM and PPR TWGs) on RGC initiatives and proposals related to integrating and strengthening core planning/budgeting processes. (2)

MOP (lead)

CRDB

MEF

 

 

tbc (MoP)

 

tbc

To identify and seek remedies to - emerging opportunities and challenges related to national or global aid effectiveness commitments - P&H TWG ToR para IV(d)

Strengthen mutual accountability and partnerships through developing capacity to manage multi-stakeholder processes

The Partnership-building initiative developed in 2009 will be concluded (stage 3 as part of evaluation)

CRDB (lead)

All P+H members

PD Evaluation reflects on progress

Step 4 identifies progress / challenges

End-April 2010

Q4 2010

Ensure that new development partner personnel are well-briefed on national arrangements for managing development cooperation and partnerships

The induction resource for development partners is posted on CRDB website. The TWG will work in an advisory capacity to update the structure and content for newly-arrived DPs

http://www.cdc-crdb.gov.kh/cdc/aid-management-cambodia.html

All P+H members

On-line induction briefing prepared and placed on-line

 

On-going

 

Notes

1.     Some activities may be taken forward by smaller groups, as agreed by the full membership of      P+H TWG.

2.     MoP is the lead agency on this initiative so PPR TWG is the principal forum.

3.     Not all tasks/responsibilities included in the P&H TWG ToR (para IV) are explicitly included in the 2010 AWP but may be addressed as the need arises.
 

Annex Two

The 2010 Cambodia Aid Effectiveness Report

Concept Note

 

Background

The RGC will convene the 3rd Cambodia Development Cooperation Forum (CDCF) in June 2010. The 2010 Cambodia Aid Effectiveness Report (AER) will be prepared as a background document and aid effectiveness will also comprise one of the substantive agenda items for the meeting. Using data and other evidence to assess performance against global agreements (Paris Declaration, Accra Agenda for Action) and national frameworks (H-A-R Action Plan, JMIs on aid effectiveness), the AER will identify relevant policy recommendations for dialogue and future implementation.

 

Structure of the 2010 AER

As the third AER to be produced for CDCF meetings, the structure has been largely established and will adopt a similar format to the 2007 and 2008 AERs.

 

  1. Introduction examining the nature of the aid effectiveness development results relationship and situating it in the Cambodia context
  2. Activity - Overview of the development partnership reflecting on aid effectiveness-related activities since CDCF2, examining their consistency and relevance to need (including aid effectiveness JMIs, sector initiatives, NGO partnerships).
  3. Data analysis reviewing aid trends, especially with regard to their 'fit' to Paris and AAA principles and priorities
  4. Impact and results Using other policy evidence and processes Paris Declaration Evaluation, JMIs, RGC reforms - to review the impact of recent global and national initiatives on aid effectiveness (AAA, aid effectiveness JMIs, NSDP Update). To be forward looking and consider new priorities/challenges in aid management (e.g. climate change adaptation)
  5. Policy recommendations - and directions (including to reflect on likely global directions and their relevance to Cambodia)
  6. Conclusions

 

Preparation and data sources

The main data and evidence base will be drawn from Cambodia and global sources:

Cambodia information / data

a)       NSDP Update (sections on partnership)

b)       Main RGC reforms (especially PFM, PAR, D&D)

c)       ODA Database (data provided by cut-off date of 10 March)

d)       Evaluation of the Paris Declaration (global exercise case study)

e)       JMIs, sector reviews and relevant research

f)        TWG reports to the GDCC (with follow-up interviews as appropriate)

g)       Other policy papers and initiatives (e.g. Partnering)

Global information / data

h)       Accra Agenda for Action (e.g. "beginning now" commitments)

i)        Paris Declaration evaluation global synthesis

j)        Paris Declaration monitoring survey global report

k)       Other official documents (Accra HLF, OECD/DAC Working Party)

l)        Other relevant items of global research on aid, capacity and partnership

 

Content and theme

The 2010 AER is produced at a time when the current global and national policy frameworks are drawing to a close (both reach their end-dates end-2010). The AER will therefore focus on three aspects of aid effectiveness work, in line with global research:

 

(i)         the extent to which policy has been implemented especially AER 2008 recommendations - in order to secure reforms to aid delivery and management practices (including a focus on the education sector as an example of good practice);

(ii)        the extent to which these may have contributed to improved development results/outcomes; and

(iii)       future priorities for implementing aid effectiveness commitments and for securing their impact on development outcomes.

 

The 2010 AER, in cooperation with RGC Ministries/agencies and TWGs, will therefore attempt to have a more applied analysis than in previous Reports. This will enable more specific policy actions to be identified rooted in actual experience of implementation. The end-result will be to inform the preparation of a new policy framework (to replace Harmonisation, Alignment and Results Action Plan 2006 2010) which will be prepared in the second half of 2010.

 

Process and Timeline

CRDB/CDC will make available a draft report for comment before Monday 26 April but it can only do this if development partners comply with the 10 March deadline for validating data.

 

After this deadline the analysis stage will begin and there can be no further data input/validation.

 

Based on comments received and any further clarifications from the Paris Declaration Evaluation, the AER will be finalised and sent to the printers by Friday May 7th.

 

Timeline for AER 2010 development

 

Feb

March

April

May

June

Concept Note for consultation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Paris Declaration Evaluation (draft findings)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Review of JMIs, preparation of new JMIs (revised format)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ODA Database - data validation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Data analysis

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Draft AER (ONLY if DPs meet data deadline)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Paris Declaration Evaluation (final draft)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deadline for comments (& PDE clarifications)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Final drafting and produce report for printing

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Printing

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Distribution in advance of CDCF3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CDCF3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

                                                              Annex Three

 

Development Partner projected disbursements 2010 (USD)

(as of 16 December 2010)

 

 

 

As donor / funding source

As implementing partner

Donor

CDCF MYIFF

Govt-sector

Non-Govt sector

Grand Total

Govt-sector

Non-Govt sector

Grand Total

ADB

162,700,000

163,445,331

 

163,445,331

163,888,462

583,456

164,471,918

World Bank

84,050,000

127,270,043

 

127,270,043

148,813,439

3,810,931

152,624,370

Global Fund

tbc

41,183,130

 

41,183,130

41,183,130

 

41,183,130

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FAO

474,000

11,162,000

 

11,162,000

11,885,480

 

11,885,480

IFAD

0

2,300,000

 

2,300,000

2,300,000

 

2,300,000

ILO

2,288,689

150,000

51,702

201,702

150,000

51,702

201,702

UNAIDS

253,000

200,000

 

200,000

200,000

 

200,000

UNCOHCHR

 

 

 

 

 

2,500,000

2,500,000

UNDP

13,197,000

8,041,299

 

8,041,299

11,588,722

4,016,685

15,605,407

UNESCO

1,158,948

1,173,289

317,476

1,490,765

1,173,289

317,476

1,490,765

UNFPA

3,772,000

3,890,984

744,936

4,635,920

3,890,984

744,936

4,635,920

UNICEF

14,691,000

15,871,980

 

15,871,980

20,120,643

 

20,120,643

UNODC

54,500

 

 

 

 

 

 

WFP

28,647,168

29,558,833

 

29,558,833

30,297,385

 

30,297,385

WHO

tbc

4,500,000

 

4,500,000

4,500,000

 

4,500,000

 sub-total

64,536,304

76,848,385

1,114,114

77,962,499

86,106,503

7,630,799

93,737,302

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Belgium

tbc

1,254,431

 

1,254,431

1,254,431

 

1,254,431

Denmark

15,000,000

16,368,150

 

16,368,150

23,454,616

1,078,361

24,532,977

Finland

1,453,562

1,477,105

219,719

1,696,824

 

219,719

219,719

France

25,296,387

26,876,717

4,540,996

31,417,713

26,433,586

3,957,540

30,391,126

Germany

19,538,000

46,285,129

11,579,567

57,864,696

46,439,617

11,579,567

58,019,184

Netherlands

 

 

1,259,823

1,259,823

 

1,259,823

1,259,823

UK

45,047,000

35,090,226

1,366,249

36,456,475

8,082,706

1,366,249

9,448,955

Spain

7,845,122

1,920,236

19,000,747

20,920,983

1,181,684

19,000,747

20,182,431

Sweden

33,483,000

10,705,233

8,544,051

19,249,284

4,805,135

2,027,366

6,832,501

EU/EC

61,561,997

35,902,795

17,812,179

53,714,974

32,815,947

14,001,248

46,817,195

  sub-total

209,225,068

175,880,022

64,323,331

240,203,353

144,467,722

54,490,620

198,958,342

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Australia

48,408,665

35,602,055

85,543

35,687,598

32,745,705

85,543

32,831,248

Canada

5,280,250

4,955,970

3,418,189

8,374,159

4,955,970

3,418,189

8,374,159

China

162,207,000

64,360,311

 

64,360,311

64,360,311

 

64,360,311

Japan

112,290,000

60,225,570

 

60,225,570

60,225,570

 

60,225,570

New Zealand

3,611,000

2,590,155

1,107,117

3,697,272

2,230,701

28,756

2,259,457

Rep of Korea

tbc

18,664,000

 

18,664,000

18,664,000

 

18,664,000

Switzerland

2,499,583

 

2,777,778

2,777,778

 

2,777,778

2,777,778

USA

tbc

27,894,000

25,465,000

53,359,000

31,277,459

25,465,000

56,742,459

  other-bilat

334,296,499

214,292,061

32,853,627

247,145,688

214,459,716

31,775,266

246,234,982

Grand Total

854,807,871

798,918,972

98,291,072

897,210,044

798,918,972

98,291,072

897,210,044

                                                                 Notes

                                                               1.     MYIFF figures provided in December 2008 at 2nd CDCF meeting

                                                               2.     Implementing partner ("point of delivery donor") is the methodology used for the PD Survey

 
 

Annex Four

Using the JMIs to Promote Development Results

Reformulating the JMI Matrix for CDCF3

January 2010

 

Background

The Joint Monitoring Indicators have been employed by the Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) and its development partners since the 2004 Consultative Group meeting. They are based on the results-frameworks established by the RGC and development partners in all Technical Working Groups (TWGs), with critical indicators identified and elevated to the status of JMI for regular reporting and discussion at the Government-Development Partner Coordination Committee (GDCC). With their foundations in sector partnerships, JMIs have been agreed (or endorsed) at every CG/CDCF meeting since 2004.

 

The objectives of the JMIs may be re-stated as:

  • Agree realistic and achievable targets for achieving priority development outcomes and reform goals as outlined in RGC policy documents (principally the Rectangular Strategy and the NSDP) and in line with sector/thematic plans.
  • To create consensus around the activities to be undertaken, the resources to be mobilised, the timeframe for implementation and the respective commitments of RGC and its development partners to achieving the targets.
  • To foster and promote joint efforts to achieve development goals in a results-based manner informed by the principles of partnership and mutual accountability.

 

Moving to results-based JMIs

Dialogue at previous GDCC and CDCF meetings has identified scope for further improvement of JMI formulation, management and monitoring processes. Agreement has been reached that the JMIs need to be more results-based in order to establish a closer relationship between: (i) desired development outcomes (e.g. as defined in the NSDP or CMDGs); (ii) outputs (i.e. the verifiable product of an activity); and (iii) activities, including to ensure the use of indicators that are robust and useful in order to assess progress.

 

Linking aid effectiveness to development results

By promoting this results-focus the JMIs may then reinforce partnership efforts in all TWGs to deliver improved results and serve as a means to strengthen and use RGC planning, monitoring and M&E/reporting systems.  This will ensure that the JMIs are fully consistent with on-going public administration reforms in order to secure sustainable improvements in capacity and performance. In this way, and by explicitly including aid effectiveness in the JMI matrix format, on-going efforts to link aid effectiveness initiatives with development results may be more grounded in relevant sector activities and monitoring processes (e.g. coordinated capacity development initiatives, improved M&E systems, joint sector reviews).

 

A revised JMI template/matrix

Based on consultations during the "Managing for Development Results" training conducted for RGC and development partners in November 2009, the JMI template will be revised to capture the whole 'results chain', with activities and outputs (with their indicators) linked to development outcomes/results. The JMI formulation process the consultations that take place within TWGs to prepare the JMIs can then be used to build partnership/consensus for implementing activities and delivering the desired results. This process should, in turn, ensure consistency across all JMIs in establishing their link to RGC priority outcome-results and reforms.

 

The modified template is presented overleaf. It will be subject to a process of consultation between TWG Chairs and development partner TWG Facilitators. Once finalised, it will then be used for JMI identification and formulation to be agreed at the April GDCC meeting and endorsed at the Third meeting of the CDCF in June.


 

Revised JMI Template Format (Draft for discussion)

Immediate outcome

Output

Output indicator

Activity

Associated aid effectiveness actions

Coordinating Institution

Implementing Institution

Timeline

Funding source identified

The immediate outcome (associated with NSDP, CMDGs or sector plans) is the development result that can be expected to be achieved within the lifetime of the JMIs (i.e. 18 months) and can be verified by the M&E process during, and immediately after, that period.

The verifiable result of the activity (and focus for routine monitoring)

 

Emphasis on being feasible, realistic in timeframe, & within RGC/DP influence

To be:

 

Specific

Measurable

Achievable

Relevant

Time-bound

 

Choice of indicators to be informed by (or derived from)

NSDP M&E framework or sector plan as relevant

The actions required to achieve the identified output.

 

These should be at a  sufficient level of ambition to ensure the output will make a contribution to the higher-level outcome (and achievable within the 18-month timeframe)

Identification of relevant and priority actions that are required to build partnership and secure improved aid practices

This is the body which defines the activity and leads on monitoring

This is the body(ies) that implements the activity (if different from the coordinating institution)

Intermediate timelines may be identified for different steps but the total time to achieve the output is to be equal to the period of the JMIs lifetime (i.e. 18 months)

This may be limited to the source of funding (costing is not required)

Examples

1)  Improved access to clean water (as opposed to the health benefits that may be recorded over the longer-term)

2)  Improved school enrolment/retention (as opposed to the improved employment/income opportunities that  may result in the longer-term)

 

Examples

1)  An output indicator linked to provision of clean water outlets or coverage

 

 

 

2)  Output indicator of measures to promote enrolment or retention

 

Drawn from NSDP or sector programmes

 

Establish and/or strengthen PBA

Improved TC and capacity activities

Joint reviews, M&E & MfDR approaches

Partnership principles

Initiatives to build partnership and mutual accountability

Integration of main reforms (eg PFM/PAR)

RGC

TWG

RGC

DP

 

 

Yes/No

Identification of funding sources

 

 

Notes

1.   Joint can mean either jointly identified, formulated, implemented, monitored based on the principles of partnership and mutual accountability

2.   While the outcome should be identified and should be measurable, the focus of JMI monitoring is on the output. This will ensure that identified outputs are within the influence of RGC and development partners to deliver, and can be more easily monitored/verified using routine M&E arrangements.

3.   Aid effectiveness activities included here will allow the AE JMI (#2) to be integrated with main JMIs.

4.   Funding source is to indicate mobilisation of resources (Yes/No & source, amount not required).

 

 

 

 


Home | 2nd CDCF Meeting| 1st CDCF Meeting | Partnership and Harmonization TWG | GDCC | Policy Documents Guidelines | Donor Dev. Coop. Pgm. | NGO