Structure and process of the Global
Partnership’s second monitoring round
2015-16
[Draft version – shared for online consultation 30 March
– 30 April 2015]
Contacts:
Julie Seghers, tel. +33 1 45 24 90 36, email: julie.seghers@oecd.org
Liz J.E. Chung, +1 718 483 6675, email: liz.chung@undp.org
Yuko Suzuki Naab +1-212-906-6509, email: yuko.suzuki@undp.org
1
Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership
This document presents briefly the monitoring framework of the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation (GPEDC) and sets out the planned process to conduct its second round in 2015-16. It includes:


Key features of the global monitoring framework;
A description of the process and indicative timeline through which data will be collected, analysed and
reported at the international level to produce the second Global Partnership monitoring report.
PURPOSE OF THE GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP MONITORING
The monitoring framework of the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation (GPEDC) was
established in 2012 to support international accountability for making progress in the implementation of the Busan
commitments for more effective development co-operation.
In order to track progress in the effectiveness and quality of development co-operation, the GPEDC monitoring
framework monitors behaviour change in development co-operation (i.e. are development co-operation
stakeholders strengthening country ownership, are they focused on results, are they promoting inclusive
development, are they transparent and accountable?). The monitoring framework focuses on measuring the
quality of development partnerships, which is in turn expected to contribute to the achievement of development
impact. It is complementary with other accountability frameworks which monitor development results and outcomes
themselves (e.g. the MDGs monitoring and forthcoming Sustainable Development Goals monitoring).
The monitoring framework is composed of 10 indicators grounded in the Busan commitments, with targets set for
2015. These indicators are not intended to serve as a narrow scorecard for ranking countries or organisations, but to
generate evidence-based policy dialogue on development co-operation and its effectiveness, to facilitate mutual
accountability and learning at the country, regional and global levels.
The focus on accountability, which remains a central feature of the Busan Partnership agreement, needs to be
balanced against the broader scope of the Global Partnership as a space for learning and knowledge-sharing. The
nature of the agreement reached in Busan recognizes that different stakeholders may approach a common agenda
for development in different ways. Participation in global efforts to monitor the implementation of the Busan
Partnership agreement is also on a voluntary basis, and is not a prerequisite for participation by stakeholders in the
broader political dialogue and activities undertaken under the auspices of the Global Partnership for Effective
Development Co-operation.
PROCESS OF THE SECONG GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP MONITORING ROUND 2015-16
The Busan Partnership agreement strengthens the emphasis on country-level implementation of commitments, and
the Global Partnership monitoring framework was designed to reflect this spirit of a country-led approach; developing
countries determine when and how they engage in global monitoring efforts, based on their own data, planning
cycles and country priorities.
The Global Partnership monitoring framework grounds data collection in existing national monitoring processes. This
approach aims at strengthening domestic accountability by grounding the monitoring efforts in developing countries’
own accountability mechanisms and information systems and engaging a broader set of national stakeholders in the
monitoring process. In this regard, developing country leadership provides the foundation for global accountability.
2
Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership

Data collection grounded in existing developing country processes
To produce periodic global progress reports and source the indicators relying on country-level data, the UNDP-OECD
joint support team encourages developing countries to use their own monitoring mechanisms, tools and systems –
where they exist – to report data to the global process. At present, an increasing number of countries have their own
frameworks and tools in place to monitor the effectiveness of development co-operation. The first monitoring round
of the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation (2013-14) saw a wide range of countries using their
own tools and systems and drawing on existing data and processes. Within these national tools and processes, the
standard methodology and definitions agreed at the international level are applied, which ensures a maximum degree
of consistency and comparability in the data reported by different countries.
The overall idea behind the Global Partnership monitoring approach is to ensure a degree of aggregation and
comparability in the evidence generated through national frameworks, while avoiding the creation of parallel
monitoring tools and cycles that primarily serve international reporting needs.
Ways of grounding data collection in country processes – Illustrative examples
A growing number of countries have embedded monitoring of development co-operation effectiveness or partnership commitments
in their own systems and processes. Ways of achieving this include the following approaches:
-
-
-
Incorporation of selected Paris Declaration and now Busan global indicators in data collection through country-level aid
management systems (e.g. Burundi Aid Management Platform, Cambodia ODA database, Rwanda Development
Assistance Database).
Use of some or all Paris Declaration and now Busan global indicators in country-level mutual accountability frameworks
(e.g. Mozambique Performance Assessment Framework of the Programme Aid Partnership, Rwanda Donor Performance
Assessment Framework, the Pacific Islands Forum Compact)
Collection and analysis of data from providers of development co-operation in advance of annual partnership dialogue
(i.e. Roundtables, annual high level dialogue on development partnerships, etc.).
Ad hoc arrangements may need to be established for countries, which are interested to participate in global
monitoring efforts but do not have in place processes or tools for periodic collection of country-level data required for
some or all of the indicators drawing on country-level sources of data. However, such arrangements should,
whenever possible, be designed in a way that supports broader country-level monitoring and reporting efforts
beyond those of the Global Partnership.

Data sources
The global monitoring framework consists of: i) indicators measured using data collected at the level of individual
developing countries and aggregated to offer an overview of global progress; ii) and indicators drawing on other
sources of information and established through desk reviews and other mechanisms. The table below establishes the
distinction between those two categories of indicators.
3
Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership
Two categories of sources of information
Source of information for the second
monitoring round
Country level
Other
10 Global Partnership Indicators
Indic.1 Development co-operation is focused on results that meet
developing countries’ priorities
Indic.2 Civil society operates within an environment which
maximises its engagement in and contribution to development
Indic.3 Engagement and contribution of the private sector to
development
Indic.4 Transparency: information on development co-operation is
publicly available



 OECD - DAC / IATI
Indic.5 Development co-operation is more predictable

Indic.6 Aid is on budgets which are subject to parliamentary
scrutiny
Indic.7 Mutual accountability among development co-operation
actors is strengthened through inclusive reviews


Indic.8 Gender equality and women’s empowerment

Indic.9 Effective institutions: developing countries’ systems are
strengthened and used
 (9.b)
Indic.10 Aid is untied
 (9.a) CPIA
 OECD - DAC
For the indicators sourced at the developing country level, some indicators rely on quantitative data collected from
government systems and/or providers, while other indicators are assessed through a more qualitative approach,
entailing a specific multi-stakeholder process to collect feedback and perspectives from different country level actors
(CSOs, private sector, parliamentarians). For all of the country level indicators, data collection is coordinated by
governments (sometimes, the source exists in the Aid Information Management Systems (AIMS), other times
governments need to obtain information from providers directly). The table below distinguishes between these
quantitative and qualitative approaches:
Country level indicators – quantitative or qualitative assessment
Quantitative assessment
Country-level Indicators
Data from
governments
Data from
providers
 Government-led questionnaire involving
providers
 Government-led questionnaire involving
CSOs, providers and parliamentarians
 Government-led questionnaire involving
the private sector
Indic.1 Development co-operation is focused on results that
meet developing countries’ priorities
Indic.2 Civil society operates within an environment which
maximises its engagement in and contribution to development
Indic.3 Engagement and contribution of the private sector to
development
Indic.5 Development co-operation is more predictable
Qualitative assessment*
 (5b)
 (5a)


Indic.6 Aid is on budgets which are subject to parliamentary
scrutiny
Indic.7 Mutual accountability among development cooperation actors is strengthened through inclusive reviews

Indic.8 Gender equality and women’s empowerment

Indic.9 Effective institutions: developing countries’ systems
are strengthened and used
 (9.b)
Note: the qualitative assessment approaches for indicator 1, 2 and 3 are currently being refined.
4
Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership

Reporting year of reference
The monitoring exercise draws on data according to government fiscal year; the reporting year of reference is the
latest fiscal year of the developing country for which there is information available. This also means that all data from
providers of development co-operation is expected to be provided according to the developing country’s fiscal year.
In developing countries where the fiscal year differs from the calendar year, and where monitoring data is easily
available through existing systems, governments may wish to complement fiscal year data with calendar year data.
While this would remain optional, it would contribute to facilitate aggregation and comparability of data.
As mentioned above, in 2012, the targets related to the GPEDC indicators were set for 2015. The second monitoring
round would therefore aims at using data from the 2015 fiscal year (or 2014-15 calendar year).

Data submission
Developing country governments, which coordinate the data collection and validation processes, will be expected to
submit data to the UNDP-OECD joint support team by means of a country spread sheet specially designed for the
purpose of participating in global monitoring efforts.
The spread sheet is an Excel document that records the data for the indicators measured through country-level
information sources (for your reference, the country spread sheet used for the first monitoring cycle is attached). In
the first monitoring round, Indicators 1, 2 and 3 were not monitored yet, and were therefore not incorporated into
the country spread sheet. The UNDP-OECD joint support team is currently exploring options on data submission
modalities for these three indicators in the second monitoring cycle (given the qualitative nature of these indicators,
incorporating them into the country spread sheet might prove challenging).
Once the country spread sheet has, under the leadership of the government, been completed and validated at
country level, it should be submitted to the UNDP-OECD joint support team by email
(monitoring@effectivecooperation.org) by 28 January 2016 at the latest. Upon receipt of the spread sheet, the joint
support team will follow up with the designated developing country authorities for any necessary clarification.

Roles and responsibilities
Developing countries governments lead the data collection process and participation of Global Partnership
stakeholders in the monitoring effort at the country level. Developing country government focal points play a lead
role in:




Informing country stakeholders and facilitating their contribution;
overseeing data collection; organising multi-stakeholder dialogue for data consolidation, validation
and review;
submitting data to the joint support team; and
Facilitating multi-stakeholder dialogue on monitoring results and mutual review of progress.
In the previous monitoring round, governments found it useful to nominate national co-ordinators who were typically
senior officials in ministries of finance, and or planning responsible for aid management and coordination.
Some countries also found it useful to appoint a provider focal point to assist and support them in this process,
particularly to co-ordinate data collection from providers of development co-operation. Whether a government wants
to nominate such a provider focal point for the Global Partnership monitoring efforts, and which partner may best fit
this role, is left to each government to decide. UNDP has previously played such a role in some countries, and stands
ready – on demand – to assume a similar role in this monitoring effort as well.
Providers of development co-operation play an important role in supporting this process in-country, by:


providing the necessary data to the government, in their co-operation countries (providers report
their data at country level directly to the government focal point);
participating in multi-stakeholder dialogue for data consolidation, review, and validation; and
5
Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership

participating in multi-stakeholder dialogue on monitoring results and mutual review of progress.
Global programmes (for example, The Global Fund, GAVI…) are also invited to participate. For all providers, the incountry head of the organisation is responsible for ensuring the quality and accuracy of reporting. At the same time,
previous experience has demonstrated that the provision of guidance and incentives from these organisations’
headquarters to their respective country offices is essential, not only to support data provision and review but also to
facilitate follow-up dialogue and providers’ review of progress together with their development partners. For any cooperation providers that may not have representation at country level, focal points at regional or global level may be
identified to coordinate any necessary data provision to national governments
Parliamentarians, civil society organisations, the private sector and other stakeholders play an important
role in monitoring progress in implementing Busan commitments. While country-level quantitative disbursement data
for the purpose of the Global Partnership monitoring framework is provided by governments and providers of
development co-operation, these stakeholders are encouraged to actively take part in the dialogue described below.
Moreover, on the two pilot indicators related to engagement and contribution of civil society and private sector to
development (indicators 2 and 3 respectively), these stakeholders represent key actors for the qualitative assessment
at country level, and their active participation will be essential The process for assessing both these indicators will be
coordinated by national government focal points. [More detail will follow once the pilot approaches to both indicators
are finalised.]

Validation of data through inclusive country level dialogue
Alongside close collaboration with co-operation providers at the country level to collect, review and validate countrylevel data, inclusive communication among a wide range of stakeholders is important. It ensures the quality of the
reporting and it strengthens mutual understanding of progress and challenges in making co-operation more effective.
Local authorities, parliamentarians, CSOs and representatives of the private sector are encouraged to participate in
inclusive country dialogue around monitoring Busan commitments. Undertaken in the context of countries’ own
monitoring frameworks and coordination and mutual review processes, such dialogue should wherever possible be
used as an opportunity to review key data that will be shared with the UNDP-OECD joint support team. Multistakeholder dialogue and validation is an important contribution to ensure the accuracy of data used to monitor
progress at the global level, and to strengthen the impact of the monitoring effort.

Report production
The data collected at individual developing country level will be compiled by the joint UNDP-OECD support team into
a second global Progress Report1 to inform political level dialogue at the second High-Level Meeting of the Global
Partnership in 2016.
The second Progress Report will provide a global snapshot of the state of play in implementing selected Busan
commitments. It will draw attention to progress made since the first Progress Report (April 2014), and to remaining
gaps in reaching the 2015 targets set for the indicators. Results and key findings presented in the report will
contribute to mutual learning and serve as a tool to spark dialogue on making development co-operation more
effective at global, regional and country level.
In the spirit of a globally light monitoring approach, it was decided in 2012 that the reporting burden on developing
countries would be further alleviated by giving up the former practice observed under Paris Declaration monitoring of
1
The first global Progress Report (April 2014) was released at the midpoint between the Busan High-Level Forum and the 2015
target date for the Millennium Development Goals. To support the preparation of the second Progress Report, it is foreseen that a
technical advisory group (currently being established) would contribute to quality assurance of the Second Progress Report,
supporting the translation of the results and keys findings into actionable and policy relevant recommendations
6
Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership
producing individual country chapters. Therefore under the Global Partnership monitoring approach, countries are not
expected to submit additional qualitative information (previously in the form of the “country report”).
However, to strengthen the country-level impact of Global Partnership monitoring efforts, individual country
governments are strongly encouraged to facilitate inclusive dialogue with the wide range of country-level
development stakeholders to review the monitoring data and results and to discuss opportunities and challenges for
mutual progress.
INDICATIVE TIMELINE
This timeline is built on the assumption that a monitoring report will be available for September 2016. It will
ultimately be guided by the timing of the second High-Level Meeting. The main steps and milestones described below
are presented to guide countries and organisations interested to participate in global monitoring efforts so that they
can plan and organise their efforts. Country-level specific milestones should be adapted to country contexts.
March September
2015
Preparation and sensitisation
Consultation, sensitisation and engagement efforts led by the UNDP-OECD support team
through an online consultation on the draft structure and process of the second monitoring
round regional/thematic events.
Enhanced outreach by the GPEDC Co-Chairs and Steering Committee members to secure
broader participation in the second monitoring round.
September
2015
Endorsement of the strengthened framework, process and timeline for the second
monitoring round by the GPEDC Steering Committee.
September October 2015
Support to roll-out country-level data collection and validation
Workshop(s) organised for developing country governments to support the rolling out of the
monitoring framework of the Global Partnership [the scope and number of workshops to be
defined pending availability of necessary funding].Based on feedback received from countries,
Monitoring Guidance and country spread sheet finalised and circulated to the national coordinators in participating countries as well as other stakeholders.
Information and outreach to development co-operation providers (to facilitate headquarters’
outreach to country offices) and other Global Partnership stakeholders to attract broad
participation in the monitoring effort.
On-going support to national co-ordinators for data gathering, validation and submission.
November
2015 February 2016
Data collection and validation
The national co-ordinators facilitate country level data collection in collaboration with
development partners, Civil society and the private sector, including convening consultations
and dialogue for data validation.
Subsequently, national co-ordinators submit to the UNDP-OECD support team by 28
February 2016 the completed country spread sheet based on data available at the country
level for the latest government fiscal year 2015 (or 2014-15).
Information on indicators drawing on global processes is gathered under the co-ordination of
7
Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership
the joint support team.
March-May
2016
Data processing, review and final validation
Consolidation and aggregation of country-level data and desk reviews for indicators drawing
on global-level data sources.
Full country data tables are sent to national co-ordinators for final review in consultation with
relevant stakeholders. In the case of any errors in the data, national co-ordinators notify the
joint UNDP-OECD team.
To the extent possible, data arising from the globally sourced indicators will be shared, as
available and relevant, with country level stakeholders.
Providers of co-operation also receive for information their full set of data pertaining to each
country in which they have reported data to the government. Any final comments to provider
data are communicated directly to the respective national government focal point for possible
further consideration. All final data are communicated to the joint support team by developing
country government focal points.
JuneSeptember
2016
Aggregation, Analysis, Report production and publication
Data is analysed by the UNDP-OECD support team and used as a basis for the progress report
to inform political dialogue at the second Ministerial Meeting of the Global Partnership.
Exact timeline for publication and dissemination of findings to be confirmed. This will include
on-line access to the full set of data.
September –
Dialogue and dissemination
December 2016
Discussion and use of the report’s findings at country, regional and global (HLM) levels.
HELP DESK
A web-based “help desk” will be established within the community space for the Global Partnership, which is
intended to provide answers to frequently asked questions, a peer exchange space to share access to expertise,
technical information and good practices.2
The community space features a separate section dedicated to monitoring, which provides a space for exchange of
experience among country stakeholders and access to technical advice about the implementation of the agreed
methodologies and processes for monitoring. The section also includes key reference materials and is regularly
updated with frequently asked questions and answers. In offering a “one stop shop” for all ad hoc questions on
indicators and the supporting methodology, this centralised support helps to ensure that arrangements for global
monitoring, while relying on existing sources of data, provide reliable and comparable data across participating
countries and organisations.
The help desk function is co-ordinated by the UNDP-OECD joint support team and brings together specialists from
the two organisations, including from the UNDP regional centres and country offices, which play a key role in
supporting overall country-level implementation of Busan commitments and monitoring of progress.
2
This web solution builds on the UNDP Teamworks web platform and offers a password-protected ‘intranet’ for Global Partnership
stakeholders.
8
Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership
Alongside this web-based platform, a dedicated email account will service stakeholders’ practical questions on data
collection and review as was the case during the first monitoring round.
How do I contact the help desk?
Stakeholders leading and contributing to the monitoring process are encouraged to visit the monitoring section of
the Global Partnership community space which contains relevant documents and responses to frequently asked
questions. To register, please email: community@effectivecooperation.org
For any queries, please contact: monitoring@effectivecooperation.org
QUESTIONS FOR PARTICIPANTS TO THE ONLINE CONSULTATION
Question 1. Do you have any specific comments or recommendations to strengthen the process and structure for
the second monitoring round described above?
Question 2. Is a period of four months sufficient for data collection and validation? Will a reporting deadline of 28
February 2016 allow you to report data from your most recent government fiscal year 2015 (or 2014-15)?
Question 3. Would you have any specific feedback to improve the Guide to the Monitoring and the Country Spread
Sheet? Visit the dedicated Teamworks page to access the versions of these documents used for the previous
monitoring round (in English, French and Spanish).
Question 4. How can the GPEDC foster better communication and outreach to ensure full commitment and
engagement of stakeholders in the monitoring process?
Question 5. In your view, how can the UNDP-OECD support team further facilitate the use of findings from the
second global Progress Report and generate dialogue at country, regional, and global levels to strengthen mutual
accountability and ownership of the analysis? The extent to which countries and other stakeholders used the findings
of the 2014 Progress Report varied, with some participating countries undertaking thorough national processes to
disseminate and discuss monitoring findings (e.g. Ethiopia launched a Post-Busan monitoring analysis focusing on the
country’s results coming out from the first monitoring round, Burkina Faso undertook a renewed monitoring of
GPEDC indicators in late 2014 to assess national progress since the first monitoring round, the Asia and Pacific
Region launched their own progress snapshot based on monitoring data). In order for more countries to lead such
national and/or regional follow-up processes, what kind of support to facilitate the use of findings would you consider
useful (background materials, FAQs, etc.)?
Note: The “global-light, country-heavy” approach agreed on in 2012 foresaw that the Global progress reports would
not include standard country chapters (as was the case with the Paris Declaration monitoring surveys). It was
decided that, countries would need to consider how best to consolidate evidence of both quantitative and qualitative
nature to produce country-specific assessments of progress in implementing Busan commitments which meet their
own development co-operation priorities and monitoring needs. During the first monitoring round, the UNDP-OECD
joint support team drew on existing country-level analyses, where relevant and available, to complement the
evidence generated through the global indicators and invited countries to point the team in the direction of any such
products. This information was compiled into Chapter 5 of the first Progress Report: Country actions to implement
the Busan commitments. Feedback from participating countries however revealed an appetite for stronger support
from the UNDP-OECD support team to facilitate further the use of findings from the report.
9
Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership