Not a load of CODswallop

Here are the presentations and papers from a recent Brookings conference on aid. Most of them relate to the macro v. micro initiative debate, recently stirred up by Prof. Banerjee from MIT.

However the most interesting thing is a set of slides from Nancy Birsall's Center for Global Development on an idea for development programmes delivered through 'Cash on Delivery' (COD).

The idea is that donors would only get paid for their outcomes (not inputs). For example, a donor working on education would receive $100 for every child who completed a year of primary school. This would obviously put much greater pressure on donors to perform.

Three-eyed monster

Let's have a closer look at the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (known as '3IE') which has been driven forward by Nancy Birdsall of the Center for Global Development (the subject of the previous post).

In Bellagio earlier this year a group of development agencies decided upon the wording of a proposed founding document for 3IE. It will be a non-profit membership body which will commission 'rigorous' impact evaluations of development programs. The founding members are:

• African Development Bank
• Asian Development Bank
• Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
• Canadian International Development Agency
• Center for Global Development
• Department for International Development
• European Bank for Reconstruction and Development
• Millennium Challenge Corporation
• Ministry of Finance, Lesotho
• Ministry of Finance, Nigeria
• Ministry of Finance, Uganda
• Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Netherlands
• Ministry of Health, Mexico
• Ministry of Trade, Indonesia
• National Treasury, South Africa
• Planning Commission, India
• UNDP-Regional Bureau for Africa
• William and Flora Hewlett Foundation

They should obviously be applauded for their insight and ambition and other development agencies (most notably INGOs) should be encouraged to join 3IE as soon as possible.
However, in the spirit of constructive criticism it is worth highlighting three crunch questions as a litmus test for the robustness of the organisation:

• Will the evaluation standards be explicitly defined, rigorous and methodologically sound?
• Will the process for choosing impact evaluations ensure that the right studies are conducted?
• Will there be institutional safeguards to ensure that members' blushes are not spared?

I hope the answer to all three is 'yes'; time will tell.

Heralding a new dawn

Here's an interview with Nancy Birdsall, posted on the International Herald Tribune website.

I asked Nancy a question about programme evaluation and she kindly responded, giving details of the work of her Center for Global Development in this field.