Indicator 17.15.1 Extent of use of country-owned results frameworks and planning tools by providers of development cooperation

Indicator 17.15.1: Extent of use of country-owned results frameworks and planning tools by providers of development cooperation

Target 17.15: Respect each country’s policy space and leadership to establish and implement policies for poverty eradication and sustainable development

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)

Definition:

This indicator measures the extent to which, and the ways in which, all concerned development partners use country-owned results frameworks (CRFs) to plan development cooperation efforts and assess their performance.

The indicator assesses the degree to which providers of development cooperation (i.e. development partners) design their interventions by relying on objectives and results indicators that are drawn from country government-owned results frameworks reflecting the country’s development priorities and goals.

Concepts:

Country-owned results frameworks (CRFs) define a country’s approach to results and its associated monitoring and evaluation systems focusing on performance and achievement of development results. Using a minimal definition, these results frameworks include agreed objectives and results indicators (i.e. output, outcome, and/or impact). They also set targets to measure progress in achieving the objectives defined in the government’s planning documents.

The definition of country-owned results framework used for this indicator allows the possibility to use equivalent priority-setting mechanisms at the country level since not all countries articulate their priorities through consistent, integrated CRFs.

In practice, country-owned results frameworks defined at the country level are often broadly stated (e.g. long-term vision plans, national development strategies) and operationalised in more detail at the sector level (e.g. sector strategies), where specific targets and indicators are set for a given timeframe.

Some examples of CRFs are long-term vision plans; national development strategies; joint government-multi-donor plans; government’s sector strategies, policies and plans; subnational planning instruments, as well as other frameworks (e.g. budget support performance matrices & sector-wide approaches). In contrast, planning and priority setting documents produced outside the government, such as country strategies prepared by development partners, are not considered CRFs.

Percent (%)

The monitoring is a voluntary and country-led process. Country governments lead and coordinate data collection and validation. At country level, data are reported by relevant government entities (e.g. the Ministry of Finance/budget department for national budget information) and by development partners and stakeholders. OECD and UNDP support countries in collecting relevant data through the Global Partnership monitoring exercise, and these organisations lead data aggregation and quality assurance at the global level.

Name:

Leading central ministry from reporting countries. Typically, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Planning, or the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, depending on the division of labour within each government.

Description:

Representatives from the leading ministry in country governments are responsible for leading the national data gathering process and country-level validation. These representatives coordinate the data collection process at the national level by consolidating data and inputs from providers of development co-operation, civil society organisations, the private sector, and trade unions. For calculation of indicator 17.15.1, country governments submit the data to the OECD/UNDP Joint Support Team of the Global Partnership.

The Global Partnership monitoring exercise collects data beyond the scope of the proposed indicator, including additional aspects such as quality of national development planning, the enabling environment of civil society organisations, the quality of public-private dialogue, the predictability of development co-operation, and the use of country public financial management systems by providers of development co-operation. Data generated from the Global Partnership monitoring provide evidence for two additional SDG indicators: 17.16.1 and 5.c.1.

To provide a comprehensive measure on the extent of use of country-owned results frameworks and other government-led planning tools, the indicator calculates the degree to which objectives, results, indicators and monitoring frameworks associated with new development interventions are drawn from government sources – including national, sector and subnational planning tools.

For each development intervention of significant size (US$ 100,000 and above) approved during the year of reference, the following dimensions are assessed:

• Q1. Whether objectives are drawn from country-owned results frameworks, plans and strategies 0/1
• Q2. Share of results (outcome) indicators that are drawn from country-owned results frameworks, plans and strategies %
• Q3. Share of results (outcome) indicators that will rely on sources of data provided by existing country-led monitoring systems or national statistical services to track project progress %

Global aggregates for the indicator (for partner countries and providers) are obtained by averaging the three dimensions of alignment with country’s priorities and goals across all new interventions for the reporting year.

Aggregated averages per partner country will provide the extent to which CRFs and planning tools are used by providers of development co-operation operating in that specific country in the design and monitoring of new development projects.

All formulas are available at: http://unstats.un.org/sdgs/files/metadata-compilation/Metadata-Goal-17.pdf

Aggregated averages per development partner will indicate the extent to which that development partner uses CRFs and planning tools in the design and monitoring of new development projects in countries in which it operates. Formulas are available at: http://unstats.un.org/sdgs/files/metadata-compilation/Metadata-Goal-17.pdf

When aggregating, the size (budget amount) of the project/ intervention is not considered as weight in order to give the same level of importance to the extent of use of country-owned results frameworks and planning tools in medium-sized vs. larger projects, as the indicator tries to capture the overall behaviour of development partners in designing new interventions in a given country. Weighting by project size would otherwise overrepresent infrastructure projects and underrepresent interventions focused on influencing policies and institutional arrangements. Nevertheless, data on project size is available.

2024-09-27

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)

17.16.1 and 5.c.1

2