TWG Network meeting on Development Effectiveness
27-28 February 2012
Feedback form – consolidated comments
1. Results-based
monitoring
How useful was this session?
-
Government respondents (25) gave this
session an average of 4.3 out of 5. The highest score was 5 (12 respondents),
the lowest score was 3 (4 respondents).
-
DP/NGO respondents (23) gave this
session an average of 3.7 out of 5. The highest score was 5 (2 respondents), the
lowest score was 2 (1 respondent).
Other comments provided by respondents
Questions were asked about the main lessons and areas of focus for future work,
the use of a proposed Managing for Development Results Community of Practice,
and the need for further CRDB/CDC support. Responses focused on four main sets
of issues. In order of frequency, these are:
-
The interest in developing results frameworks
(mainly at sector level) & CRDB support
-
The importance of integrating ODA into budget
frameworks at sector level
-
The need to clarify the JMIs and their link to
sector and national results frameworks
-
The importance of producing a robust NSDP
monitoring framework
2. Development effectiveness – PBAs, country
systems and the core reforms
How useful was this session?
-
Government respondents (25) gave this
session an average of 4.3 out of 5. The highest score was 5 (10 respondents),
the lowest score was 3 (3 respondents).
-
DP/NGO respondents (21) gave this
session an average of 3.6 out of 5. The highest score was 5 (2 respondents), the
lowest score was 2 (2 respondents).
Other comments provided by respondents
Questions were asked about the main lessons and areas of focus for future work,
and the need for further CRDB/CDC support. Responses focused on five main sets
of issues. In order of frequency, these are:
-
PBA implementation is a priority for many TWGs
(see the workshop report), especially with a focus on strengthening systems
through the application of the core reforms.
-
Promoting TWG effectiveness (leadership,
revision of TORs to cover the application of the core reforms and systems
strengthening).
-
The need to develop relationships beyond the
TWG, including other RGC ministries/agencies for cross-cutting issues and to
those that lead the reforms, as well as the private sector.
-
The need for PBAs to be based, especially in
the early stages, on comprehensive resource frameworks (BSP/AOP) that are
linked to a sector results framework.
-
CRDB/CDC support should include support to PBA
roadmap development and to improved knowledge management (developing tools
and access to model examples of PBA components and their application other
sectors).
3. Partnering and dialogue mechanism
How useful was this session?
-
Government respondents (25) gave this
session an average of 4.3 out of 5. The highest score was 5 (11 respondents),
the lowest score was 3 (2 respondents).
-
DP/NGO respondents (22) gave this
session an average of 3.5 out of 5. The highest score was 5 (2 respondents), the
lowest score was 2 (3 respondents).
Other comments provided by respondents
Questions were asked about the main lessons and areas of focus for future work,
need for further CRDB/CDC support. More than half of the responses recognised
the need to improve partnership and dialogue quality but did not make any
specific recommendation. In general, the responses focused on three main sets of
issues. In order of frequency, these are:
-
Strengthen dialogue quality, especially between
senior-level counterparts, and its coverage to focus on results and the
resources (domestic and external) that need to be managed in a coherent
framework (e.g. in a single BSP/AOP)
-
Improve the use and application of existing
tools (PBAs, partnership principles) to bring together all DPs (some decline
to join) and major CSOs, as well as to explore opportunities for working
more closely with regional partners/donors and private sector
-
Many development partners identified the need
to improve TWG leadership/ownership and coordination across sectors as TWGs
were currently not addressing some development issues that partners wish to
discuss
4. Overall impressions and feedback for the future
Overall, how useful was this meeting in
supporting the work of your TWG?
-
Government respondents (25) gave the
overall meeting an average score of 4.6. The highest score was 5 (12
respondents), the lowest score was 3 (1 respondent).
-
DP/NGO respondents (22) gave the
overall meeting an average score of 3.6. The highest score was 5 (4
respondents), the lowest score was 1 (1 respondent).
Other comments provided by respondents
Questions were asked about the preparation and organization of the meeting and
how it could be made more effective and useful in the future. In the responses
to the three sessions (above) there was little distinction between the
suggestions made by Government and DP/NGO participants. In this final set of
suggestions, however, there was a marked difference between the two groups. Most
Government respondents left this section blank, offered thanks for a good
meeting or asked for future meetings to be broadly similar. Of the very few more
critical Government observations, these mainly related to logistics (advance
sharing of the documents, having them prepared in Khmer, insufficient DSA etc).
Conversely, almost all development partners provided lengthy comments and
suggestions. These bullet points therefore relate almost exclusively (but not
entirely) to development partner inputs:
-
Almost without exception, every DP response
observed the need for more senior-level RGC representation for the meeting
to be useful in promoting TWG performance/results
-
Future meetings should include more
senior-level MEF/CAR/NCDD representation as the core reforms are the main
entry points for capacity/systems development
-
Future meetings should allow more time for: (i)
other TWGs (especially good performers) to present to offer practical advice
on how to promote TWG performance; (ii) dialogue within TWGs based on a
simpler and more focused review/reporting template
-
Full meetings of each TWG would be useful to
prepare for the retreat by allowing inputs and suggestions of all TWG
members
|