Post an IdeaIt only takes a minute Most PopularWhat's Hot Most RecentJust Posted Most CommentedWhat's Creating a Buzz?

Comments & Ideas have closed

Thank you for your Comments & Ideas!

 

  « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6
2480
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

idea 22: ask 'whose perception'?

posted by: ADG, 24 Mar 2011, 16:06 PM     category: 3. Efficiency & effectiveness

This idea covers perceptions - donor vs partner government vs beneficiary.

2 people noted the difference in concepts of aid effectiveness between donors and recipients. Another suggested broadening our thinking of effectiveness to include other factors from the recipient perspective, like trade policy and investment. 1 person suggested that unexpected outcomes can denote a program’s effectiveness – as assessed by a participant, rather than a project manager or donor’s view. 1 person suggested Australia ‘move to a more authentic ‘development partnership’ to enable a more equal partnership, better public understanding of aid, clearer direction to program managers. To do this, they suggest Australia make its aid expectations clearer...

[refer TOR 3]

Do you strongly agree? If so, please vote here.

 
2271
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

Focus on 'Organisational Structure'

posted by: ADG, 06 Jan 2011, 15:24 PM     category: 4. Organisational structure
4th on the Review Team's TORs is a look at the best future organisational structure for the aid program. That includes AusAID's structure for aid delivery, but also coordinating Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) across the public service and with other donors and institutions. A tough one to balance and get right, and no easy answers... but any ideas on starting points, here?
 
2120
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

5. Appropriate (i) ODE role-How can we strengthen reviews’

posted by: ADDC, 09 Mar 2011, 15:13 PM     category: 4. Organisational structure

ADDC recommends that:

  • an ‘Ambassador for Disability-Inclusive Development’ be created at Deputy-Director General level to promote leadership and accountability for disability-inclusive development both within and external to AusAID (refer d & e) below)
  • investment is given to resources for greater DPO capacity building and involvement 
  • the Disability Inclusive Development (DID) unit within AusAID has sufficient resources to maximise the quality of AusAID’s policy and practices in inclusive development

(excerpts from Australian Disability and Development Consortium (ADDC)’s submission to the Aid Review Panel. ADDC is an Australian based, international network with 450+ members working on disability in developing countries).

 
3167
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

idea 23: australians & our aid

posted by: ADG, 24 Mar 2011, 16:07 PM     category: 4. Organisational structure

1 consultant believed country partners valued Australians’ ‘informality, friendliness and competence’, though noted some Australians’ over-confidence in positions, and also an AusAID reputation for being ‘expensive,  inflexible and isolated institutionally… a paternalistic institution’...

[ref TOR 4A]

Do you strongly agree? If so, please vote here.

 
3271
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

idea 24. disability in structure

posted by: ADG, 24 Mar 2011, 16:11 PM     category: 4. Organisational structure

2 people recommended disability inclusive development initiatives for AusAID, including a dedicated team in this area, an ‘Ambassador’ for this area at DDG-level, and further devolution and explanation of the ‘Development for All’ strategy to Posts and government departments...

[refer TOR 4A]

Do you strongly agree? If so, please vote here.

 
3173
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

idea 25: whole of govt. approach

posted by: ADG, 24 Mar 2011, 16:11 PM     category: 4. Organisational structure

1 person suggested that aid could be best delivered under an independent authority within the Foreign affairs portfolio, working across portfolios to ensure that the best and most relevant sectoral information is incorporated into aid programs.  They suggested a governing board would enable the authority to have more freedom to focus on effectiveness and the distance from cabinet may provide more flexibility and freedom to innovate with reduced political risk...

[refer TOR 4B]

Do you strongly agree? If so, please vote here.

 
3229
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

idea 26: donor coordination

posted by: ADG, 24 Mar 2011, 16:13 PM     category: 4. Organisational structure

4 people expressed the view that ‘donors trip over each other’, and suggested agencies need to ensure their structures seek to overcome a ‘great deal of overlap… spending money on the same projects… [lack of] sharing of information’. 1 person suggested focusing resources more intensively on some forgotten countries or promising reformers would improve donor coordination.

1 person noted examples of doubling aid to avoid, e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan and PNG, characterized by ‘lots of TA, a parallel civil service of local consultants, MCs and NGOs ignoring Government’. Another person suggested that 'while the paris declaration expresses an intent or hope that donors will collaborate with each other in signatory countries', they believe donors rarely collaborate...

[refer TOR 4C]

Do you strongly agree? If so, please vote here.

 
3053
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

idea 27: strengthen evaluations

posted by: ADG, 24 Mar 2011, 16:16 PM     category: 5. Reviews, evaluation & risk

1 person suggested AusAID has a reasonable evaluation policy, but that it lacks sound implementation. In particular, they suggest: more open and formal responses to evaluations; the better use of data (and its analysis); and more follow-up on monitoring and evaluation plans. They also suggest a greater position-accountability in AusAID for monitoring and reporting on programs. 1 person suggests capacity building for ODE so they can measure and evaluate for disability inclusive development...

[refer TOR 5A]

Do you strongly agree? If so, please vote here.

 
2871
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

idea 28: for recurrent funding

posted by: ADG, 24 Mar 2011, 16:17 PM     category: 5. Reviews, evaluation & risk

2 people noted a historical taboo against funding ‘recurrent expenditure’ (and a reticence for donors to use partner country systems where they are weak and threaten implementation). They suggest ‘allowing the resources to be allocated to where the bottleneck is,… often in the recurrent budget’.  Another person expressed the view that it is very difficult to get recurrent funding in to the national recipient country budget...

[refer TOR 5B]

Do you strongly agree? If so, please vote here.

 
2826
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

idea 29: partner procurement

posted by: ADG, 24 Mar 2011, 16:18 PM     category: 5. Reviews, evaluation & risk

1 person noted another donor, ADB’s, focus on strengthening partner country’s procurement capacity in Asia and the Pacific, and suggested this as a focus for AusAID. They suggested public procurement reform as a thematic sector in AusAID rather than under governance or PFM. 1 person suggested funds through local community groups and local NGOs as they viewed them as more ‘efficient and effective in acquitting funds and making a difference [than governments]’...

[refer TOR 5B]

Do you strongly agree? If so, please vote here.

 
  « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6