15
Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement April 26, 2013 in Washington, DC Jesper Johnsøn, U4/CMI

Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement

  • Upload
    shino

  • View
    31

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement. April 26, 2013 in Washington, DC Jesper Johnsøn, U4/CMI. A. Some projects. Focus on the missing middle ( outcomes ). Theories of change Cost-effectiveness /- benefit analysis framework for AC ( mainstreaming ) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement

Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement

April 26, 2013 in Washington, DC Jesper Johnsøn, U4/CMI

Page 2: Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement

A. Some projects

• Theories of change • Cost-effectiveness/-benefit analysis

framework for AC (mainstreaming)• Proxy indicators, in baskets

Focus on the missing middle

(outcomes)

Adapting evaluation methods to

GAC

Page 3: Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement

Theories of change in anti-corruption work

• Theory-based evaluation tradition, going beyond logframes and result chains, focus on preconditions, interdependencies and complexity

• Supports indicator development, data collection

• 5-step tailored methodology

Page 4: Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement

Accountability and Integrity Initiative, Afghanistan

Page 5: Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement

Accountability and Integrity Initiative, Afghanistan

Page 6: Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement

Accountability and Integrity Initiative, Afghanistan

Page 7: Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement

Cost-effectiveness/benefit analysis framework• CEA = compares costs to an overall effectiveness

measure, outcome level – # bribes, integrity scores, “missing” expenditures,

recovered assets, student scores, maternal health

• Main challenge = identifying same single quantifiable effectiveness measure

• Opportunity = AC impact does not have to be measured via corruption levels (mainstreaming)

Page 8: Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement

CEA of different anti-corruption interventions

Page 9: Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement

CEA of AC package in sector programmes

Page 10: Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement

Work plan

A. Build up body of knowledge from past work:– Map existing academic literature using CEA/CBA methods

(done)– Reconstruct CEA/CBA ratios (resource intensive)

B. Apply methodology to programmes under design- Formative, operational research- Benefit from piloting, sequencing, and randomisation

Page 11: Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement

B. Response to questions

• Q1-4: Begin with problem analysis/information needs define desired outcomes (hard)/questions develop indicators. – Indicators often the easy part (unless you want one for everything) – Skipping straight to standardised indicators could be prescriptive

• Q1: Actionable indicators = reform indicators?– Different level of results – overall performance vs. specific reform– Overall performance indicators can be widely standardised, specific reforms

cannot . Proxy indicator baskets, LSMS?• Q3: Cannot provide reliable, comprehensive data on the cheap

– Already much innovation (BEEPS, PETS, QSDS, PAPI, GCB, Afrobarometer, GI/Indaba).

– Rely on proxies for non-quantifiable social phenomena. – Combine different types of indicators (including proxies) in country-specific

baskets, a la LSMS (poverty)– Need indicators at different levels of results

Page 12: Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement
Page 13: Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement
Page 14: Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement

Code of Conduct example, level of results

Page 15: Workshop on Innovations in Governance Measurement

Code of Conduct example, building an impact story