The intention of this indicator is to see a progression towards strengthening local capacity for planning, implementation and on-going accountability to country’s citizens and parliament. Thus, it is counting the number of PIUs that are parallel, which is defined as “created and operates outside existing country institutional and administrative structure at the behest of a donor.” Thus, what is intended from criteria 1 is to see whether the PIUs is accountable to external funding agencies and donors (donors, UN agencies, NGOs) or to country implementing agencies (ministries, departments and agencies).

Thus, to answer your question, a country implementing agency is a ministry, department, agency, municipality or other institutional and administrative structure of the country, not external structures. Thus, you will not include NGOs and donors. You will see examples from Rwanda, Cap Verde and South Africa for this indicator on page. 17-18 of the definitions and guidance.

To work out the number of missions and joint missions and avoid double counting, you may consider the below worked example.

You will first establish a list of missions on one column, and then a list of donors on another.

You will use C for coordinated or S for single, un-coordinated mission to count the number of missions / joint missions for each donor.

You will establish the total number of mission for country X in Column F (Column F should always be one);

You will establish the total number of Joint missions in Column G.

C= Coordinated

S= Single Missions (uncoordinated) 

Response: For your question on cost of UNDP country staff, they should be included as ODA (Question Qd1/2). However, the following instructions (below) should be applied to determine if that should be considered disbursements for the government sector (Question Qd3/4).

·         What to include as disbursements for the government sector:

        For projects that deliver goods or services that support the government sector (for which there is some form of agreement with a national authority that these goods/services are desired), then the figure that should be reported is the full cost of delivering the aid in question, including administrative overheads.

In other words, for agencies in the United Nations, such projects should report the whole cost of a project, including GMS and ISS (acronyms for administrative overheads and general management fees). Other donors also have various forms of overhead, and also will report the full cost of delivering the project - to the government sector or otherwise.

·         What not to include as disbursements for the government sector:

         As a general rule, unless the projects/activities were specifically considered by government to be             support to the government then those projects or costs would be excluded. For example, internal development projects, such as staff supporting the Office of the Resident Coordinator, functioning of implementation support centers) should be excluded.

ODA provided by donors to NGOs is ODA and should be counted when responding to donor questionnaire Questions Q d1 /Qd2.

The question is whether that is considered as “ODA disbursed for the government sector,” which is the donor questionnaire Questions Qd3/Qd4. It is counted when the government sub-contracts implementation of a programme to a CSO. Please see definition for disbursement for the government sector below:

ODA 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. This includes works, goods or services delegated or subcontracted by these administrations to other entities such as:

Non-Governmental organisations (NGOs);

semi-autonomous government agencies (e.g. parastatals), or;

private companies.

Response: The focus of the survey is on the central government. In order to answer this, you will first have to answer the question whether the PDC is authorized (or not) to receive and expend funds on behalf of the central government (this is the same with municipalities). If yes, then this is considered as disbursement for the government sector as it is: ODA 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.

If the PDA is not authorized to receive / expend funds on behalf of the central government, than the funds is not counted as disbursement for the government sector.

In order to answer this question, you will need to check whether PDCs are authorized to receive / expend funds on behalf of the central government or not.

Examples:

If WHO and UNICEF works with Canada, it will be counted as 1 joint mission.

If WHO, UNICEF and UNFPA complete a study or mission together, it would count as on UN mission, which is 1 joint mission.

If the World Bank and IMF goes on a mission or conducts a study together, it is considered as 1 joint mission.

What counts as disbursements for the government sector?

The definition is: ODA 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. This includes works, goods or services delegated or subcontracted by these administrations to other entities such as:

à  Non-Governmental organisations (NGOs);

à  semi-autonomous government agencies (e.g. parastatals), or;

à  private companies.

Examples:

If Germany contracts a company to build a road, and this is agreed with Ministry of Public Works, it would count as disbursed for Government sector – even though no revenue passes from Germany to Government and the Government has indirectly (rather than directly) “delegated or subcontracted” the German contractor to build a road?

Yes, the fund is not recorded in the government budget, but it is disbursed for the government sector.

If France provides media training to parliamentarians (a branch of government) and the Government (executive) considers this doesn’t fit with its national priorities, then would the government may exclude such a programme from the French total of aid disbursed for the government sector?

No, even if the porogramme is not aligned with the country’s priorities, it is still considered as disbursement for the government sector.

If UNICEF delivers a $1,000,000 immunisation programme in accordance with an agreement with the Ministry of Health then even where UNICEF uses its own staff or it contracts an NGO to deliver the programme, the full value of this programme is counted as disbursed for the government sector?

Yes, as UNICEF is delivering the programme based on the agreement with the Ministry of Health. The programme is delivered through UNICEF directly sub-contracting to a NGO.

Example:

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

Who should count the $1 million in the questionnaire? Japan or Unicef?

Unicef should, not Japan.

Donors providing ODA in a partner country, including non-DAC donors such as Korea, Mexico, Islamic Development Bank, or other global programmes (Global Fund to fight HIV/AIDS Malaria, Tuberculosis) are encouraged to fill out the donor questionnaire and participate in dialogue. The Donor Focal Points are encouraged to ensure that these donors are informed of the process.

For the purpose of the survey, funds channelled directly to CSOs by a donor, without agreement with government authorities, is not considered as disbursements for the government sector. On the other hand, funds given directly to a CSOs by a donor (without agreement with administrations) can count towards total ODA to a country (if it fulfils the criteria of ODA).

Yes. A “donor” is defined as a country, organisation or official agencies — including state and local governments — that provides Official Development Assistance. Thus, ODA provided by for example, the Ministry of Agriculture of Belgium to a Ministry of Agriculture in a partner country should be counted. However, there should be only one consolidated questionnaire for one donor country. For the purpose of presenting the results, there will be only one heading, for example, “Belgium” for all ODA provided by different agencies of Belgium.  

Yes. All donors in the partner country are invited to answer the donor questionnaire. It will be up to the responding agency to use their own criteria to identify which share of their portfolio counts as development aid or emergency aid. Please also refer to the definition of “Humanitarian Aid” under the DAC Statistical Directives.

Please refer to definition of Fiscal Year 2006/07 for the purpose of the 2008 Survey (Under Indicator 3, Definitions and Guidance): The fiscal year is the fiscal year of the country receiving ODA. In the last survey in 2006, both the donor and the partner governments were asked to report data against the partner country’s fiscal year. This is not the case in the 2008 Survey. In order to have data available in time for the Accra High-Level Forum both donors and partner countries are required to report against the calendar year 2007 except in the case of Indicator 3 (Aid Flows aligned on national priorities) that is measured against partner country’s fiscal year 2006/07.

There are six documents that comprise the 2008 Survey package. They are:

1. Explanatory Note — Provides information on the purpose and process for managing the survey at country level.
2. Donor Questionnaire — Questionnaire for all donor agencies providing Official Development Assistance directly to the country receiving aid.
3. Government Questionnaire — Questionnaire to be completed by government authorities in the country receiving aid.
4.  Country Spreadsheet — This is an Excel Spreadsheet which is used to consolidate data for the survey.
5. Country Report —Provides space for qualitative assessment of the survey.
6. Definitions & Guidance — Provides definitions and guidance for completing the Donor and Government questionnaires.

The questionnaires should be completed by the government (Government Questionnaire) and by ALL donors providing official development assistance to the country. Each donor should complete ONE questionnaire combining ODA from all its agencies (Donor Questionnaire) and submit the results to the Donor Focal Point, where appointed, or the National Coordinator, for consolidation in the Country Spreadsheet.( For countries without a Donor Focal Point, the questionnaire should be communicated directly to the National Coordinator)  Once the data has been consolidated, it is submitted to the National Coordinator who convenes a meeting to discuss the results before submission of the full survey results to the OECD for analysis. Civil Society Organisations should NOT complete the questionnaires.

National Coordinators can decide to appoint a donor, or another organisation, to assist and support the National Coordinator in managing the 2008 survey. The role of the Donor Focal Point is to:
- Collect survey data from all donors in a timely way.
- Consolidate survey data in the Country Spreadsheet.
- Make available survey data and relevant information to the National Coordinator for discussion at the various meetings convened by the National Coordinator for the 2008 Survey.
- Help the National Coordinator mobilise the financial or human resources that are needed to manage the 2008 Survey in a timely way.

In many countries, the Donor Focal Point is typically the lead donor(s) coordinating harmonisation or aid effectiveness initiatives at country level.

Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) play an important role in the Survey. While they should not complete questionnaires (even when they implement ODA) they are encouraged to take part in country level dialogue on aid effectiveness by attending the relevant meetings convened by the National Coordinator.

BACKGROUND TO THE PARIS DECLARATION:TRACKING AND ENCOURAGING PROGRESS
Actions not words — More so than previous agreements, the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness goes beyond a statement of general principles and lays down a practical, action-oriented framework to improve the quality of aid and its impact on development. The partnership commitments included in the Paris Declaration are organised around five key principles:
Ownership – Developing countries exercise effective leadership over their development policies, strategies and co-ordinate development efforts. Donors’ are responsible for supporting and enabling developing countries ownership by respecting their policies and helping strengthen their capacity to implement them (para. 14 and 15).
Alignment – Donors base their overall support on partner countries’ national development strategies, institutions and procedures. For example, this means that donors will draw conditions, wherever possible, from a developing country government’s development strategy, instead of imposing multiple conditions based on other agendas (para. 16).
Harmonisation – Donors aim to be more harmonised, collectively effective and less burdensome especially on those countries, such as fragile states, that have weak administrative capacities. This means, for instance, establishing common arrangements at country level for planning, funding and implementing development programmes (para. 32).
Managing for results – Both donors and partner countries manage resources and improve decision-making for results. Donors should fully support developing countries efforts in implementing performance assessment frameworks that measure progress against key elements of national development strategies (para. 43-46).
Mutual accountability – Donors and developing countries pledge that they will hold each other mutually accountable for development results.

Targets for the year 2010 have been set for these indicators — These targets, which commit both donors and partner countries, are designed to encourage progress at the global level among the countries and agencies that have agreed to the Paris Declaration (see on page 7). They are not intended to prejudge or substitute targets which individual donors or countries may wish to set, but rather provide a flexible benchmark against which countries and organisations can measure their performance. Progress towards the achievement of these targets will be reviewed at the Third High-Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Accra (2-4 September 2008). A final round of monitoring will be undertaken in 2011 in order to assess whether the 2010 targets have been met