Annual Review (Multilateral Organisation Core funding)
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD): Initiative for Mainstreaming
Innovation (IMI)
Date started: 2004
Date review undertaken: March 2013
Introduction and Context
What support is the UK providing?
Under IFAD’s Sixth Replenishment (covering the period 2004 – 2006), the UK provided a
complementary core contribution to IFAD to support its Initiative for Mainstreaming Innovation
(IMI). The UK committed the amount of US$10 million or £6.6 million at the fixed exchange
rate for the Sixth Replenishment period.
What are the expected results?
The IMI’s goal is to enhance IFAD’s capacity to promote innovations that will have a positive
impact on rural poverty and to support the Fund's role as a facilitator, mediator, enabler and
promoter of innovation.
It aims to strengthen the tools with which IFAD can increase the scope and quality of replicable
innovations piloted and disseminated by IFAD and its partners to reduce rural poverty.
Its expected outcomes are:
•
•
•
Innovation mainstreamed into IFAD operations;
Strengthened learning on innovation and sharing, and the application of such learning;
and
A changed organisational culture and practices for supporting innovation.
What is the context in which UK support is provided?
At the time of the Sixth Replenishment contribution IFAD was undergoing a process to clarify
its comparative advantage. Innovation was identified as a key component. IFAD was
considered as a comparatively small Organisation that could pilot innovations in its niche focus
area. Successes could then be scaled up by other larger Organisations. In order to
strengthen capacity and create space and resources for innovation, the Initiative for
Mainstreaming Innovation was proposed as part of IFAD’s Sixth Replenishment. As core
resources, their use was not time-bound and the initiative has evolved over time, realigning
with subsequent corporate change and reform processes.
1
The Sixth Replenishment also requested that an Independent External Evaluation of IFAD be
conducted. The recommendations of this led to the development of an Action Plan to improve
IFAD’s Development Effectiveness that was agreed at the time of the Seventh Replenishment.
Innovation and Knowledge Management were a pillar of this and over this period (2007 – 09),
the IMI supported work on developing corporate strategies.
In the context of rising food prices and greater international focus on food security, the Eighth
Replenishment saw a significant increase in resources made available to IFAD. Its mandate
had become clearer. The reform programme had successfully focussed IFAD on results and
its new business model, including the introduction of country presence and direct supervision,
supported this. Evaluations demonstrated greater impact. Innovation was still viewed as
critical, also for IFAD to scale up. The institutional change and learning aspect of the IMI
therefore became even more important.
In 2009, a new President was elected and a new organisational structure was introduced. In
January 2010 the Chief Development Strategist was designated as the Champion for
Knowledge Management and Innovation (KMI) within IFAD’s Senior Management team. In
2010 a corporate level evaluation on innovation was published. It was decided to put the IMI
on hold and review to respond to evaluation findings, ensure alignment with revised strategic
objectives and change and reform processes. Implementation continued of the 38 existing IMI
financed small projects but no new IMI activities or projects were approved for funding during
2011. In October 2011, new responsibilities for the management of the IMI were assigned and
a way forward for the IMI established.
Over the last year, revised criteria for the selection of projects supported by IMI have been
developed, placing greater emphasis on learning and scaling-up in response to evaluation
findings. A plan to ensure more systematic engagement at the policy level has been agreed
and will be aligned with the priorities agreed in the Ninth Replenishment and mainstreamed
through the Medium-Term Plan for 2013 – 15, ensuring that the IMI remains relevant. In this
context, the use of IMI resources has been significantly delayed but management decided that
it was better to delay and ensure that resources were used to maximum effect by ensuring
close alignment with evolving strategic objectives and organisational changes. The IMI
continues to be highly relevant and now has the opportunity to influence and support IFAD’s
work on policy in the renewed context of the current Ninth Replenishment period.
Section A: Detailed Output Scoring
Output 1: Strengthening innovation in IFAD operations, promoting innovation in and
through country programmes, including policy dialogue and engagement
Output 1 score and performance description:
A: Ouputs met expectation. To ensure a corporate, systematic approach, all country
strategies and programme documentation now include a section on innovation. Through a
competitive bidding process, IMI projects have provided the opportunity to pilot innovations,
linked to country programmes. IFAD has reflected on findings from evaluations to ensure
alignment with renewed strategic priorities. A way forward for the IMI was redefined in 2012
that focuses on the gap identified by evaluation by developing a more strategic approach to
mainstreaming innovation in IFAD operations. Particular focus has been given to four current
2
strategic priorities that are also closely linked: scaling up; policy dialogue; south-south
cooperation (all areas in which IFAD has made commitments in the context of the Ninth
Replenishment); and knowledge management. A Plan for Country-level Policy Dialogue has
been developed and will be submitted to the Executive Board for information in April 2013.
Progress against expected results:
Indicator: Strengthened implementation of innovations and contribution to policy level
Implementation of Innovations
There are a number of examples of strengthening implementation of innovations through the
competitive bidding process for IMI funding to implement innovations, mainly through existing
IFAD programmes. A new call for project proposals was launched in November 2011 with
revised selection criteria, giving particular importance to project proposals with a clear learning
agenda, and mechanisms for drawing out and sharing lessons learnt and opportunities for
scaling up and/or institutionalisation. The panel found that 12 of the 40 bids met the review
conditions and these were approved in March 2012. Reporting shows that good progress has
been made on most of the projects to date, including the following example:
Making biogas portable: renewable technologies for a greener future
Piloting though an existing IFAD project in Kenya, the project scales up two innovative models:
i) second generation plastic bio digesters producing methane from recycled livestock and
agricultural waste; and ii) portable biogas bottling. The two innovations provide poor people
with access to a clean energy source which can also be used for generating electricity. The
pilot offers opportunities for income generation, new jobs and improved livelihoods. A
secondary effect will be improved soil fertility through the use of discarded digester effluents.
The project is on schedule and raising interest in Kenya and internationally (Cameroon,
Rwanda, India, Pakistan). Major achievements include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Nine Flexi Biogas systems installed in dairy farms within IFAD investment project
”Smallholder Dairy Commercialization Program” in Nakuru;
Four Flexi systems implemented in a rural orphanage school in Naivasha using kitchen
and human waste to produce electricity for lighting and Internet access;
M&E: qualitative and quantitative data collected and compared with fixed traditional bio
digesters.
Knowledge products and results generated: The communication awareness campaign
Shujaaz.fm is releasing a first comic strip in early 2013. Video interview with CEO/Lead
Engineer of Biogas International on potential of new generation of portable Flexi Biogas
systems.
Enhanced IFAD role in facilitating South-South cooperation: Kenyan engineers visited
the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT Delhi) to attend convention on “Current Trends on
Indian Biogas”
Developing partnerships (with Green Bricks Eco Solutions and InfoSys in India) to
internationally scale up the proposed innovation.
Contribution to Policy Level Dialogue
The Independent Office of Evaluation 2012 Annual Report on Results and Impact (ARRI)
reports IFAD’s work in policy dialogue to be one of its weaker areas. Yet the scope for IFAD
to do more in this area through its programmes is clear and the Ninth Replenishment
Consultation Report for 2013 – 15 commits IFAD to “more rigorous policy analysis, and active
3
engagement in national policy dialogue on agriculture and rural development.”
Both the ARRI and a paper by the Brooking Institute highlight the narrow focus on project
results, the over-ambitious policy agendas defined in the Country Strategic Opportunities
Programmes (COSOPs); and the lack of staff capacity and budget resources in IFAD’s
operational divisions, as factors explaining the gap between policy dialogue aspirations and
reality.
In ensuring relevance and effective use of resources, the revised focus of the IMI is being
used to address these issues, in line with IMI objectives, through developing a corporate
approach to mainstreaming country-level policy engagement into IFAD’s revised business
model and ensuring more consistent and effective engagement.
Part of the uncommitted IMI balance will be used to support the proposed programme over the
three-year period of IFAD 9 (2013-2015) to mainstream country-level policy engagement
(CLPE) into IFAD’s operating model by strengthening the focus on policy engagement through
the country programme / project cycle, including through the financing of specific country-level
activities; improving monitoring, reporting and knowledge management relative to countrylevel policy engagement; and enhancing the capacity of operational staff to engage in these
activities. Planned outcomes include:
•
•
Country level policy engagement more effectively integrated into, and throughout,
IFAD’s country programme and project cycle;
Policy notes prepared, and other incremental activities for country level policy
engagement conducted, in a limited number of pilot countries.
A Plan for Country-level Policy Dialogue was made available in March 2013 for submission to
the April Executive Board.
Indicator: Building of partnerships with innovative organisations
IFAD is building partnerships with a number of Organisations through the IMI, including with
the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and the Center for Creative
Leadership (CCL). In 2012, a project partnership was established with the Bill and Melinda
Gates Foundation. The IMI also creates opportunities to build partnerships at country level to
support innovation. One example is the project on “Filling the intergenerational gap in
Knowledge on Agricultural Water Management (AWM): twinning junior and senior experts”,
where connections have been established with various universities, research centres and
knowledge hubs in the six countries selected (Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana,
Malawi, and Niger) to support the development of junior AWM professionals, create synergies
between technology and AWM knowledge, encourage ideas and opportunities for innovation
and provide quality and continuity in AWM expertise.
IFAD is also increasing its focus on South-South and triangular cooperation (SSTC) and the
IMI is being more strategically aligned with this. The 2012 Report on IFAD’s Development
Effectiveness (RIDE), for example, reports on partnerships in this context and includes the IMI
project referred to above (Making Biogas Portable: Renewable Technologies for a Greener
Future) as an example. This project, from 2012-2013, will focus on knowledge sharing and
learning, working in partnership with Kenya and the private sector (Biogas International).
Corporately IFAD is building on this agenda beyond the IMI. One example, funded through
regular core grant financing and cited in the RIDE, is the Africa-Brazil Agricultural Innovation
Marketplace 2010-2013 Agricultural research, development and innovation work in partnership
4
with the Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation (EMBRAPA), the Arthur Bernardes
Foundation, Federal University of Viçosa (FUNARBE), the Forum for Agricultural Research in
Africa (FARA), DFID, World Bank, NGOs and the private sector.
Recommendations:
•
•
IFAD to implement plan for strengthening country level policy dialogue and to report on
progress.
Ensure linkage with Adaptation for Smallholder Agriculture Programme (ASAP) on
policy dialogue on adaptation related issues.
Impact Weighting (%): 40
Revised since last Annual Review? No
Risk: Medium
Revised since last Annual Review? No
Output 2: Learning and sharing lessons on innovation
Output 2 score and performance description:
B: Outputs moderately did not meet expectation. The IMI had not instigated adequate
reporting requirements and there was a lack of knowledge and information, despite the fact
that the IMI had the specific objective of strengthening innovations within IFAD and enhancing
learning across the organisation. However, following review over the last year, IFAD is now
addressing this. A report on completed projects was commissioned to fill the knowledge gap
and bring together lessons learnt. The IMI Progress Report to the December 2012 Executive
Board noted that the focus on extrapolating lessons from the IMI to date has involved a desk
review of all 38 implemented projects, resulting in a 3-4 page brief for each, with links to
relevant documentation. Building on this, 5-8 of the most innovative and effective projects will
be selected and more detailed case studies will be developed in 2013 to capture the
innovations, assess the impact of the projects, and explore opportunities for possible scalingup or institutionalisation.
Progress against expected results:
Indicator: Capturing knowledge from rural development programmes
IFAD has made significant improvement in addressing this aspect of the IMI through the more
strategic approach it has developed as a result of its stock-take of the IMI over the last 18
months. Through a study of all IMI projects, IFAD is now beginning to more systematically
capture knowledge and assess the most effective innovations for possible replication. Having
highlighted the importance of capturing knowledge for learning and promoting innovations, the
criteria for the project bidding process were revised to reflect this. One on the successful
projects from the projects approved last year demonstrates this:
Improved learning from IFAD-supported projects (USD200 000 + USD 200,000 from Bill &
Melinda Gates Foundation)
Studies will be commissioned on specific thematic areas of strategic importance to IFAD, in
5
association with a limited number of IFAD supported projects that focus on these thematic
areas, to explore the drivers behind project performance and impact. The studies will provide
a model to improve learning from IFAD’s on-going operations and support the application of
lessons learnt in a more systematic manner to inform project design and IFAD’s policy and
advocacy work.
The methodology for Participatory Impact Assessment and Learning Approach (PIALA) was
developed during 2012. The PIALA case studies are scheduled for early 2013. A project
partnership with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has been established and the additional
project resources mobilised will expand the number of case studies, and potentially facilitate
an initial proof of concept and subsequent scaling-up.
The Near East, North Africa and Europe Division (NEN) Portfolio Performance Review for
2011 – 2012 noted that NEN was awarded an IFAD‟s Innovation Mainstreaming Initiative (IMI)
grant for 1-year, entitled: “The learning side of impact assessment: piloting Social Return on
Investment (SROI)”. The participatory nature of SROI enables dialogue among beneficiaries
and practitioners as part of the knowledge management process, creating learning spaces for
all and an opportunity for IFAD and project staff to capture knowledge from operations. The
innovation lies in the fact that although participatory approaches are common in IFAD projects,
they are not usually included in impact assessment processes in such a systematic way.
Indicator: Communicating and promoting IFAD-supporting IFAD innovations
Knowledge management (KM) is a precondition for any form of innovation to be scaled up,
institutionalised or shared. A new KM strategy is currently being developed, guided by a
process management group so as to promote ownership and institutionalisation. This will be
directly linked to IFAD’s Ninth Replenishment commitments and will support implementation of
the organisation’s medium-term plan for 2013-2015. The first step is the design of the strategy
development process, which is being supported by the IMI.
Scaling up is regarded as “mission critical” for IFAD, focusing on how to leverage successful
innovations for larger impact on rural poverty. This was highlighted in the Ninth
Replenishment and IFAD has established a partnership with the Broking Institute on scaling
up. The renewed focus of the IMI supports this increasingly important agenda for IFAD and
will support activities: (i) at country level, with a link to planned or on-going IFAD engagement
at different stages of the project cycle (from COSOP and project design to implementation
support and supervision), as well as in policy dialogue; and (ii) at corporate level, to enable
IFAD to share experience with and learn from the global community of practice on scaling up
in agriculture and rural development, and so ensure that its country programmes and projects
are informed by innovation elsewhere and emerging best practice.
Increasing emphasis is being placed on south-south cooperation in the context of IFAD’s Ninth
Replenishment. This involves IFAD brokering knowledge between member countries, bringing
successful innovations to new contexts. In this area, the IMI will serve to support activities
aimed at achieving the IFAD 9 commitments: ensuring south-south cooperation is pursued in a
strategic manner, is mainstreamed across country programmes, and is grounded in robust
evidence base.
Recommendations:
•
•
To develop, publish and promote case studies based on the initial study of all IMI
projects.
Finalise new knowledge management strategy and use implementation of country level
6
policy engagement plan to develop Policy Notes to capture and share lessons learnt.
Impact Weighting (%): 30
Revised since last Annual Review? No
Risk: Medium
Revised since last Annual Review? No
Output 3: Changing organisational culture and practices
Output 3 score and performance description:
C: Outputs substantially did not meet expectation. There has been an increase in bids to the
innovation fund, which shows a greater awareness of and interest in the innovation agenda.
The latest Progress Report notes that part of the remaining IMI resources will be used under
the renewed approach “to mainstream innovation into IFAD operations and leverage systemic
change in terms of IFAD’s organizational culture and practices, as a precondition for
promoting innovations that have a positive impact on rural poverty.” However, overall
progress on changing organisational culture to promote innovation has been limited.
Organisational culture change is widely recognised as being difficult to achieve and requires
strong leadership from senior management. Yet, although in responding to evaluation findings
senior management committed to encouraging greater knowledge sharing and risk taking in
order to motivate staff to innovate, there is little evidence to demonstrate the fostering of a
culture that promotes open dialogue and exchange of ideas.
Progress against expected results:
Indicator: Culture change activities such as opportunities for field-level learning,
training and dialogue
Field immersion visits and have taken place and the IMI is supporting training and learning to
promote innovation. This includes a country office immersion for innovation programme
agreed in 2012, designed to give IFAD support staff based in Rome the opportunity to spend
4-5 days in an IFAD country office to enhance their understanding of country office processes
and realities, strengthen collaboration between the field and HQ and provide feedback on their
return on possible areas of improvement. IFAD Staff were invited to submit proposals for
work-related ‘projects’ that they could implement in an IFAD country office. From the
proposals received, six were found to have the requirements to be implemented. Each
selected participant has identified one country office to visit in order to work on his/her
proposed project. The country offices selected to date are Senegal, Ghana, Sudan, India,
China and Vietnam. Project visits to country offices are planned in mid-October.
Whilst these activities have been valuable in creating opportunities for innovation in all areas
and have delivered results through individual projects, there is little evidence that the impact
has been multiplied across the organisation. Without a broader enabling framework and
visible senior management leadership in fostering an organisational culture of dialogue, it will
be difficult to achieve this output as fully as hoped.
Indicator: New work arrangements and strategies for organisational innovation
7
The plan to strengthen country-level policy dialogue aims to strengthen in-house capacity and
develop an institutional culture that recognises the importance of country level policy
engagement as a distinct activity within the country programme, and integrates it at each
stage of the country programme and project cycle.
Responsibility for the IMI has now been assigned to the Strategy and Knowledge Management
Department and the Chief Development Strategist has been designated as the Champion for
Knowledge Management and Innovation (KMI) in the senior management team. However,
overall there is little evidence of proactive leadership from senior management in promoting
innovation or prioritising the creating of an enabling environment to support dialogue and
exchange of ideas. Without this, the individual activities above will be prevented from
delivering wider impact in achieving organisational change.
Recommendations:

Leadership to consider ways of creating work arrangements that encourage and
support innovation.
Impact Weighting (%): 30
Revised since last Annual Review? No
Risk: Medium
Revised since last Annual Review? No
Section B: Results and Value for Money.
1. Progress and results
1.1 Has the logframe been updated since last review? No
1.2 Overall Output Score and Description:
B. Outputs moderately did not meet expectation. Progress has been made over the last year
in all output areas, supported by the development of a more strategic focus. However,
building on individual activities to achieve meaningful organisational change remains a
challenge.
1.2 Summary of overall progress
Overall, progress had been made to incorporate innovation into the Fund’s key policy and
strategy documents. This is demonstrated by the innovation and knowledge management
strategies and the inclusion of innovation, learning and scaling up as one of the eight
principles of engagement in IFAD’s Strategic Framework for 2011 - 15.
IFAD is now addressing the gap in lesson learning and knowledge management by reviewing
all IMI-supported projects and developing case studies. The development of a more strategic
approach over the last year that aligns the IMI with latest organisational priorities of countrylevel policy engagement, scaling up and south-south cooperation is introducing greater focus
and encouraging lesson learning. IFAD has recognised the importance of scaling up and has
8
established a scaling-up initiative in collaboration with the Brookings Institution. In addition,
the strengthening of IFAD’s country presence, as well as direct supervision and
implementation support, are contributing to better results – including in identifying and piloting
innovations as well as scaling up.
IFAD’s organisational capacity for innovation remains weak overall, as highlighted by the
corporate evaluation on innovation in 2010. Achieving organisational culture change is
recognised as a difficult area and there is still much to be done to translate IFAD’s strategic
commitment to innovation into action to ensure it becomes part of IFAD’s corporate culture.
1.4 Key challenges



Capturing lessons learnt and leveraging institutional change.
Implementing corporate process to ensure more systematic policy engagement,
including at country level.
Creating an organisational culture that encourages and rewards innovation
1.5 Annual Outcome Milestone Assessment
The development of a renewed approach to the IMI, with clearer management responsibilities,
shows that more focus is being given to capturing lessons learnt from work undertaken so far
and addressing weaker areas such as knowledge management. This should also help to
achieve a more coherent approach in the final phase. The no-cost extension has been
valuable in allowing IFAD management to take stock and realign IMI resources with the latest
Ninth Replenishment commitments, increasing the likelihood of achieving the project outcome
as far as possible within the IMI. However, at this stage, almost ten years since the inception
of the IMI, IFAD management should consider concluding the IMI. This review recommends
that IFAD develop a clear, strategic plan to do this by May 2013. The IMI should be closed by
January 2014 and any remaining resources, provided as a replenishment contribution, should
be allocated to IFAD’s core country programming. UKRep Rome has raised this with IFAD
and will take forward with management. Activities should be drawn to an end and lessons
learnt extracted to maximum effect. New work on policy dialogue and knowledge
management should then be fully mainstreamed in IFAD’s work-plan and budgeting. If
agreed, the next review of the IMI should be a Project Completion Report.
More broadly, if IFAD is to achieve its agenda for innovation and scaling up, management
should review organisational procedures and culture and consider where improvements can
be made to promote and facilitate innovation at all levels.
9
2. Spending profile and timescale
2.1 Is the spend profile detailed in the Business Case being followed:
The IMI predates the current standard Business Case, but disbursement has followed a
payment schedule agreed with IFAD. The contribution was a complementary contribution to
the Sixth Replenishment covering the period of 2003 – 06, but disbursement was extended to
the beginning of the Eighth Replenishment in 2009. This allowed alignment with the
introduction of a corporate reform programme that was developed in response to
recommendations of IFAD’s Independent External Evaluation in 2007 that included innovation
and knowledge management as a key pillar.
2.2 Does the review of the cash balance position raise any concerns around payment in
advance of need:
Yes. Funding for the IMI was provided as part of the Sixth Replenishment to IFAD Resources
and should have been provided within that timeframe (2003 – 06). At the time of commitment,
the UK contribution was for USD10 million which, at the fixed exchange rate for the Sixth
Replenishment, was equivalent to £6,569,000. However, in order to align with the introduction
of the Action Plan for reform, disbursement was extended until 2009. This resulted in a gain
for IFAD as a result of exchange rate fluctuations and the total USD amount received from the
pound sterling contribution was USD12,001,881. Resources available for commitment as at
30 September 2012 were just over USD2 million and the cash balance was USD4,016,806.
The cash balance does raise concerns about the progress made, although this reflects the fact
that the programme was put on hold to take stock following a corporate evaluation on
innovation more broadly, and develop a more strategic approach for the remainder of the IMI
to support the most recent commitments of the Ninth Replenishment (2013 – 15). However,
as an IFI, IFAD resources also depend on investment from replenishment resources so
according to the rules of IFAD, replenishment payments are not in advance of need.
Nevertheless, as noted this review recommends that IFAD develops a clear strategic plan to
close the IMI as effectively as possible within the next year, whilst maximising the value of the
various projects and activities that have been implemented under this initiative. Any remaining
resources should be redirected to IFAD’s country programming.
2.3 Have additional payments linked to good performance been triggered:
Not Applicable
3. Evidence and Evaluation
3.1 Assess any changes in evidence
The MAR Update for IFAD will be conducted later this year and published. The latest reports
on IFAD’s performance through the Independent Office of Evaluation (IOE) Annual Report on
Results and Impact (ARRI) and IFAD’s reporting against its results framework in the annual
Report on IFAD’s Development Effectiveness (RIDE) indicate a continued focus on results
10
with improvements overall in delivery.
The ARRI submitted to the December 2012 Executive Board notes that the group of indicators
including innovation and scaling up shows a marked improvement since 2002 - 2004, but then
a more recent decline since a peak during 2006 - 2008. In the case of innovation and scaling
up, the report highlights that the “tailing off” in performance may be “due to changes in the way
this criterion has been evaluated in the past few years. In this regard, it is important to note
that IOE recently introduced more elaborate indicators for measuring scaling up, and the
division will pay even more attention to evaluating this criterion, which is critical given the
importance attributed to scaling up by Management, especially in the past few years.”
With regard to innovation, the Portfolio Performance Report Annual Review July 2011 - June
2012 East and Southern Africa Division (ESA) from August 2012 notes that:
This year, three more projects were rated satisfactory, resulting in an improved overall
average rating for Innovation. The scaling up of successful innovations is contingent upon
the existence of Knowledge Management mechanisms that are systematically triggered to
gather and disseminate experiences and impacts of successful (or failed) project
interventions. ESA must continue to improve in this area by streamlining KM systems into
the design and implementation stages of its projects.”
3.2 Where an evaluation is planned what progress has been made?
No further evaluation planned at this time. Implementation of previous evaluation
recommendations will be reported to the Board.
4. Risk
4.1 Output Risk Rating: Medium
4.2 Assessment of the risk level
The main risk highlighted through implementation of the IMI is the lack of an overarching
strategic approach. This is now being addressed through a renewed focus on the areas of the
IMI that have made less progress. Changes in oversight and management have created gaps
over time, presenting a risk to the successful implementation. However, following structural
reorganisation, responsibility for the IMI has now been assigned to the Strategy and
Knowledge Management Department. In addition, to increase senior management support,
the Chief Development Strategist has been designated as the Champion for Knowledge
Management and Innovation (KMI). This should help to mitigate the risk of lack of leadership
and a clear innovation agenda, increasing ownership and mainstreaming across the
organisation over the next year and making a transition from the closure of the IMI to
incorporating in IFAD’s core work plans and budget.
4.3 Risk of funds not being used as intended
Financial reporting is provided to the Executive Board in an annual Progress Report on the IMI
and included in the annual audited accounts. There is no indication of financial loss.
4.4 Climate and Environment Risk
11
Climate and natural resource management is an important area for IFAD and the UK is
supporting its work through the Adaptation to Smallholder Agriculture Programme (ASAP),
introduced as part of the Ninth Replenishment. Some of the IMI funded projects are piloting
innovations to support the development of renewable energy. Successes are planned to be
scaled up through IFAD’s programmes, including ASAP. In order to maximise positive impact
the greater emphasis being given in the IMI to policy engagement at country level will support
the development of a corporate approach that will be taken forward with ASAP.
5. Value for Money
5.1 Performance on VfM measures
The IMI has been effective in pushing the organisation to focus on innovation in a more
systematic way. This has been achieved through corporate strategies and procedures in
developing country strategies and programmes. Innovation has also been included in IFAD’s
Results Measurement Framework, which has helped to provide further stimulus at country
level. Independent Office of Evaluation reports show improvements, including in the area of
innovation. The programme has been extended (at no-cost) beyond the period anticipated,
which indicates a lack of efficiency. However, in order to ensure better value-for-money,
activities were put on hold to reflect on evaluation findings and align with renewed strategic
priorities agreed in the latest Replenishment negotiations. This has helped to maximise the
opportunity for the IMI to continue to support corporate change. Without a more strategic
approach to coordinate work and benefit from lessons learnt, there was a risk of the
programme representing poor value-for-money overall. However, clearer management
responsibilities and defined strategic areas of work are addressing this and will help to
maximise the benefits from the programme. The review recommends that IFAD now work on
drawing the IMI to an end over the next year, bringing together the lessons learnt from the
various components and ensuring a smooth transition to mainstreaming activities. UKRep
Rome is taking this forward with IFAD management.
5.2 Commercial Improvement and Value for Money
IFAD updated its procurement guidelines in late 2010. To improve its own capacity,
procurement training is carried out regularly, most recently by the Near East, North Africa, and
Europe Division, which held a 5 day procurement training session in Morocco in November
2012. This brought together representatives from IFAD-Funded projects in Egypt, Jordan,
Lebanon, Sudan, Yemen, and Gaza & West Bank. Project procurement officers and project
staff involved in procurement all participated in the training provided by professional
procurement specialists from the International Training Centre of the International Labour
organization based on IFAD procedures and drawing from practical experiences in the region.
Procurement modules have also been included in the training for direct supervision on projects
for reviewing of procurement plans.
IFAD is monitoring its internal cost management, including through the Organisation’s Results
Measurement Framework that reports on the ratio on administration costs to programme
spend. A corporate evaluation on efficiency is being carried out by the Independent Office of
Evaluation and will be published in 2013.
12
6. Conclusions and actions
The IMI was an innovative initiative itself, originally intended to be a multi-donor programme.
As part of a replenishment process, the programme was mainstreamed into core activities and
reported on transparently to the Board. At the same time, there is little opportunity for donor
engagement in managing a core contribution.
The timing of the IMI was important as it linked with an Independent External Evaluation and
the development of an Action Plan to implement its recommendations. The IMI was wellplaced therefore to support reform, piloting initiatives that informed the development of
corporate strategies. Flexibility was also important in allowing the IMI to adapt and evolve with
the changes that took place in IFAD, ensuring its continued high relevance.
Changes, weak management and oversight arrangements have, at times, led to a lack of
strategic vision in taking forward the innovation agenda. However, as this review notes, the
IMI has been effective in pushing the organisation to focus on innovation in a more systematic
way, including through corporate strategies and the inclusion of innovation in IFAD’s Results
Measurement Framework. The revised focus developed over the last year provides the
opportunity for IFAD to maximise the results from the IMI, ensuring that good practices are
drawn out from the IMI to provide guidelines and leverage institutional change. Case study
examples should be used to inform policy notes as well as the implementation of plans to
strengthen country-level policy dialogue and south-south cooperation. Revised knowledge
management policies and working arrangements will be central to building on innovation with
partners. This review recommends that the IMI should be brought to an end over the coming
year and that IFAD management develop a strategic plan within the next two months showing
how it intends to conclude the programme to maximum effect. UKRep Rome is following this
up with IFAD and will monitor progress.
7. Review Process
This was a desk-based review that looked at progress reports on the IMI submitted to IFAD’s
Executive Board as well as other reports that reflect on IFAD’s work in the area of innovation.
IFAD was consulted and shared further documentation providing evidence of a renewed, more
strategic approach to the final implementation phase of the IMI. Discussions were also held
with IFAD on the way the IMI had evolved over the last 12 months and work to ensure
alignment with IFAD’s commitments in the Ninth Replenishment, agreed by IFAD’s Executive
Management Committee.
The following sources of evidence were used:



IFAD Initiative for Mainstreaming Innovation: Seventh Progress Report on the Main
Phase, December 2012
IFAD paper on IMI proposal for a strategic programme in support of IFAD priorities
for innovation, 2012
The Near East, North Africa and Europe Division (NEN) Portfolio Performance
Review for 2011 – 2012
13




Portfolio Performance Report Annual Review July 2011-June 2012 East and
Southern Africa Division, August 2012
ARRI Annual Report on Results and Impact of IFAD Operations Evaluated in 2011,
EB December 2012
Report on IFAD’s Development Effectiveness, EB December 2012
A Plan for Country-level Policy Dialogue, March 2013
14