|
INTRODUCTION | ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES
INTRODUCTION
This indicator measures the degree of alignment of donor technical cooperation with the partner country’s capacity development objectives and strategies. As such, it measures performance by both partner countries and donors. The following paragraphs, drawn from the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, describe respective roles and responsibilities for strengthening capacity.
The capacity to plan, manage, implement, and account for results of policies and programmes, is critical for achieving development objectives — from analysis and dialogue through implementation, monitoring and evaluation. Capacity development is the responsibility of partner countries with donors playing a support role. It needs not only to be based on sound technical analysis, but also to be responsive to the broader social, political and economic environment, including the need to strengthen human resources (Para. 22)
Partner countries commit to integrate specific capacity strengthening objectives in national development strategies and pursue their implementation through country-led capacity development strategies where needed (Para. 23).
Donors commit to align their analytic and financial support with partners’ capacity development objectives and strategies, make effective use of existing capacities and harmonise support for capacity development accordingly (Para. 24).
Donor agencies support a wide range of capacity building programmes mainly in the public sector. However, donors’ collective efforts are often less effective than they could be. One reason is that, all too often, capacity building is fragmented and does not fit well with countries’ capacity development strategies.
ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES
Cambodia:
Multi-Donor Support Programme (MDSP) for Implementing the Strategic Framework for Development Cooperation
|
Criterion 1
|
YES. The Government identifies public sector capacity for aid management as a priority given that development assistance finances most national priority development programmes. The Strategic Framework for Development Cooperation Management provides a response to this. By utilising funds provided by the MDSP, the Cambodian Rehabilitation and Development Board (CRDB) has developed a capacity development strategy that communicates clear priorities and implementation arrangements.
|
|
Criterion 2
|
YES. The MDSP is fully aligned with the national development objectives and its execution is under the leadership and responsibility of CRDB, on behalf of Government.
|
|
Criterion 3
|
YES. All support is coordinated by the National Programme Director, who is the Secretary General of CRDB, and who is responsible for identifying and managing the provision of all technical cooperation.
|
|
Criterion 4
|
YES. Five co-financing development partners pool funds through a single development partner. MDSP review meetings provide opportunities for other development partners to be consulted, whilst established Technical Working Groups (including on aid partnership and harmonisation) enable all development partners to participate in the implementation and monitoring of the Strategic Framework for Development Cooperation Management.
|
Source: Source: Cambodian Rehabilitation and Development Board, Royal Government of Cambodia
South Africa Environmental Programme
|
Criterion 1
|
YES. The Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) has adapted a Medium Term Strategy and a Strategic Plan 2005-2010 which include strategic objectives, planned outputs for the period and annual targets for capacity development.
|
|
Criterion 2
|
YES. The objectives of the technical cooperation and DEAT’s strategic plan are identical.
|
|
Criterion 3
|
YES. The cooperation is managed, implemented and accounted for by DEAT. The donor supported interventions are included in the responsible line managers' regular performance contracts. Each line manager sends quarterly reports to the DEAT Director General (donor funded interventions included). The donor receives and approves annual work plan, report, budget, accounts and audit (by the Auditor General in South Africa). DEAT's regular systems and procedures are used for all interventions.
|
|
Criterion 4
|
YES. To the extent that technical cooperation is coordinated, it is coordinated by DEAT. The donors support different themes/areas and their input is coordinated by DEAT's Directorate for Planning and Coordination as well as line managers (e.g for pollution).
|
Source: NORAD
Bolivia: Integrated Alternative Development Programme
|
Criterion 1
|
YES. The Bolivian Vice Ministry of Coca and Integrated Development (VCDI in Spanish) has expressed the need for technical assistance and financial resources to increase its capacity to oversee and plan activities pertaining to coca rationalization and integrated development; strategic planning and negotiation; and monitoring and tracking of results in support of Bolivia’s Counter-Narcotics strategy 2006-2010.
USAID and the VCDI have agreed to take specific actions to increase the VCDI’s capacity through an Implementation Letter (PIL No. 028 of September 22, 2006).
|
|
Criterion 2
|
YES. Under the Bolivian counter-narcotics strategy, the VCDI faces important challenges and mandates such as developing and implementing sustainable and integrated development policies in the coca growing regions; promoting public and private investments, and leveraging additional resources; and negotiating agreements with social and economic organisations and local authorities for the implementation of development programs. These responsibilities are fully aligned with Bolivia’s National Development Plan.
|
|
Criterion 3
|
YES. The technical cooperation is jointly programmed and managed. There is a specific institutional arrangement that provides the VCDI the required professionals and support personnel to carry out the responsibilities mentioned above. This arrangement also includes field liaison professionals responsible for coordinating activities with all USAID and non-USAID funded Integrated Development projects and local actors and authorities.
|
|
Criterion 4
|
YES. See above
|
Source: USAID
Mozambique: Finance Advisors for the Ministry of Education
|
Criterion 1
|
YES. Yes. Initially, the country authorities were reluctant to have Finance Advisors in the Ministry of Education (MoE). Agreement only came after an intense dialogue between the MoE and the donor working group on education. After the first two years of service, the MoE expressed clear demand for extension because the technical assistance clearly responded to their needs.
|
|
Criterion 2
|
YES. Yes. The technical assistance is fully in line with the country’s Education Sector Plan.
|
|
Criterion 3
|
YES. Yes. The MoE procured the technical assistance with pooled funding. Contracts were made with the MoE whilst the donors helped in recruitment.
|
|
Criterion 4
|
YES. Yes. As mentioned in Criteria 3, there is a pooled fund managed by country authorities. The coordination arrangements, however, are primarily functioning because of donor’s pro-activeness.
|
Source: EDCPM (European Center for Development Policy Management)
|
