The presentation discusses the Scottish Government's International Development Fund's focus on measuring effectiveness and learning from projects. It outlines reasons for this focus, including accountability and demonstrating impact. It describes the IDF's structure, approach, and lessons learned from past experience. Recent developments include a review of monitoring and evaluation approaches and guidance on related budgets. Next steps include considering evaluation reports, refining funding round criteria, and reviewing changes to further harmonization and simplification. The overall goals are to clarify M&E purposes and methods, rigorously understand outcomes, ensure participation, and align with partners while complying with international standards.

1. The Scottish Government and
International Development
Brian Dornan
Head of International Development Team
Scottish Government

2. Presentation
“Why should the NGO sector strengthen its ability to
measure and report on outcomes, impacts and results i.e.
their effectiveness – and learn from these?”
Structure
• Why focus on effectiveness and learning?
• The IDF structure and approach
• Learning from past experience
• Recent developments
• Next steps
• What are we trying to achieve?

3. Presentation
Why focus on effectiveness and
learning?
• “External” drivers –
– the aid effectiveness agenda, Paris, Busan
– Independent Commission on Aid Impact
• Continuous improvement -
– Financial management, audit and accountability (domestic)
– Accountability to wider stakeholders (beneficiaries, partners,
governments)
– Demonstrating impact (incl. to larger donors)
– Learning for improvement

4. Presentation
The International Development Fund (IDF) –
structure and approach
• Three programmes
– Malawi
– SSA (Rwanda, Tanzania, Zambia)
– South Asia (Pakistan, Bangladesh, India)
• Grants of up to £1.3m or up to £400k
• Some are scalable – but by which donor and
through what mechanism?

5. Presentation
Learning from past experience:
• In earlier funding rounds:
– Some excellent examples of thorough M&E
However:
– Some projects did not use SMART target indicators
– Where they were offered, in some cases they were not reported
against in final reports
– Data sources were not clear
– The views of partners or beneficiaries were not recorded
– Where good M&E was in place the “story” of the project was not
always told – access to the learning was limited.

6. Presentation
Recent developments
• Desk based review of information reported by projects,
considering OECD DAC evaluation criteria of relevance,
effectiveness, impact and sustainability
• Report on “M&E – current approaches and issues for
consideration”
• Introduction of logframe to application processes
• Guidance on M&E budgets “Spend in the region of 5%
would be acceptable…would consider a higher level of
spend where the project is innovative or evidence and
learning…is critical to support wider work”

7. Presentation
Next steps
• Consideration and publication of reports
• Consideration of M&E proposals in forthcoming
funding rounds – more emphasis on refinements
• Review and consideration of changes in first half
of 2013, for funding round opening in August
2013.
• Consideration of harmonisation / simplification of
approaches

8. Presentation
What are we trying to achieve?
• Clarifying the purpose, scope and use of M&E (learning – by
whom?; accountability – upward or downward?; a focus on
meeting targets - or also unexpected impacts?)
• Rigorous understanding of project outcomes (appropriate
methods, attribution)
• Participation (of country stakeholders, in designing,
implementing and using M&E)
• Alignment with partner government systems, harmonisation of
M&E with other donors and transparency in aid data, to comply
with international standards
• M&E at programme and policy levels
• Resourcing and capacity (of SG, grant holders, country
stakeholders (M&E report)