Description

Background

The Asian Development Bank (ADB) defines Managing for Development Results (MfDR) as “an approach focused on development of outcomes throughout the management cycle.” It enables informed decision making by integrating a results focus across the four mutually-reinforcing core management functions:

• defining outcomes and outputs with measurable indicators and time-bound targets, and agreeing on associated activities,
• allocating resources to agreed activities,
• implementing agreed activities and monitoring progress and targets, and
• evaluating performance against targets.

Integral to effective MfDR is regular reporting to key stakeholders to increase accountability and promote learning. ADB built its MfDR agenda on three pillars or key result areas:

1. development results at DMC level focusing on MfDR capacity in countries,
2. results orientation at institutional level emphasizing institutional effectiveness and strengthening its own capacity to manage for development results, and
3. contributions to MfDR as part of an effective global partnership.

This study follows from the recommendation of the IED’s first (2007) MfDR assessment, which provided early feedback to help guide the evolution of MfDR within ADB. It intends to make the findings available in advance of the Asian Development Fund Annual Consultation Meeting scheduled for December 2011, and to provide inputs into the comprehensive review of the corporate results framework that ADB management has planned for 2012.

Overall assessment

Given that MfDR mainstreaming activities are still ongoing, the primary evaluative focus of the study is on the process and institutional changes within ADB stemming from the MfDR agenda, rather than on actual results on the ground, which would largely be premature at this stage. The study rates ADB's efforts in mainstreaming the MfDR as successful based on a four scale rating system of (highly successful, successful, partly successful, and unsuccessful). This overall assessment stems from separate assessments of the evaluation criteria: relevance, responsiveness, and results orientation. Also based on a four scale rating system, ADB's efforts on mainstreaming MfDR are rated relevant, responsive, and results oriented—thus all criteria achieving the second highest tier of the scale, denoting good progress with some room for improvement.

Key findings and lessons

• Mainstreaming of the MfDR agenda has progressed well to date, but there are still enough areas that need attention to warrant the preparation of a follow up action plan.
• The Development Effectiveness Review has evolved into a valued tool for reporting corporate results under the MfDR agenda.
• The paucity of systematic data updating efforts hamper the results orientation of ADB's country partnership strategies and projects.
• Current reporting tools used at various layers do not adequately stress the later results chain links, which inhibits focusing on the achievement of results.
• Strategic approaches with government ownership at the center will be needed to successfully inculcate MfDR agenda in developing member countries.
• Progress on project design and monitoring framework quality improvement has been slow and would benefit from further attention.

Key issues

• There is a crucial disconnect between output analysis and outcome analysis in the Development Effectiveness Review.
• A number of factors are hindering the “percolation” of results up the results chain.
• The results orientation of several corporate sector/thematic plans is ambiguous.
• Inconsistent application of the new project classification system may be skewing results reporting at the higher MfDR layers.

Recommendations

• Enhance the developing member countries' capacity for MfDR through a strategic, phased engagement.
• Improve the results orientation of the corporate sector and thematic plans by clearly defining their purpose and the means to monitor their achievement. Improve the corporate results framework by (i) strengthening the links between outputs and outcomes and (ii) review its indicators to serve as a better tool to gauge development effectiveness.
• Improve the monitoring and reporting of outcomes and impacts at the country/sector and project layers to ensure greater results orientation.

Related link

Development effectiveness and results at ADB

Contents

• Executive Summary
• I. Introduction
• II. ADB’s Managing for Development Results Agenda
• III. Relevance
• IV. Responsiveness
• V. Results Orientation
• VI. Overall Assessment
• VII. Findings, Lessons, Issues, and Recommendations
• Appendixes
• Supplementary Appendixes