2 Responses

  1. Garth Luke
    Garth Luke February 20, 2012 at 12:30 pm

    Thanks Stephen for this useful focus on AusAID’s activity rating system. Yes – making as much data available as possible is necessary for contestibility and is likely to provide useful information for AusAID at the same time.

    This sort of rating scheme provides an important summary of activity performance but is not sufficient. It is good to see that AusAID’s planned performance framework is going to include a lot more clear measures of output (eg x thousand children immunized) and outcome (eg achieve a y% reduction in child mortality). We’ve had too many years of satisfactory scores for activity performance but few clear and concrete measures of poverty reduction.

  2. Joel Negin
    Joel Negin February 15, 2012 at 3:19 pm

    Hi Stephen,
    Great blog – thanks.
    Perhaps you or colleagues have addressed this elsewhere but who is the ODE? It’s internal to AusAID, right? So it’s not independent assessment? Is that something you think AusAID needs or do you think an independent review every 5 years is sufficient. Most aid NGOs have independent evaluations for their projects – should AusAID have the same? Having AusAID staff evaluating AusAID projects for AusAID managers that they might work for in the future sounds a bit tricky…
    Would be interested in your thoughts.
    Joel

Leave a Reply