The Foundation hosted
the International Workshop on Performance
Measurement in Capacity Building on 27-28
April 2004 at Meikles Hotel in Harare.
92 external participants and ACBF professional
staff attended the workshop. The workshop
was facilitated by contributions from a
diversity of resources persons including
ACBF staff members, an official at the
United Nations Department for Economic
and Social Affairs (UNDESA), CAFRAD, and
other experts from India and Namibia.
The workshop was
convened with the objective of promoting
mutual exchange of experiences and learning
on how to measure performance of development
programs and projects and assess the relevance
of various performance measurement frameworks
to capacity building. Performance measurement
frameworks are widely used by development
agencies for the purpose of accountability
for the resources allocated to development
cooperation as well as the need to account
for results at the project or program level,
the development agency level and the country
level. Increasingly, the topic of development
effectiveness is a subject of concern to
the development community and a growing
number of donor countries and agencies
are reviewing mechanisms for channelling
development assistance more effectively
while ensuring transparency and accountability
in the use of those resources. The issue
of performance measurement should not be
seen as a concern of the donor community
alone for it has become a key instrument
of accountability in any democratic society
and for any organization striving for excellence
in the fulfilment of its mission.
The format of the
workshop facilitated experience sharing
between evaluation experts, practitioners
of capacity building, representatives of
donor agencies as well as capacity building
organizations supporting interventions
for the civil society sectors. The workshop
covered conceptual and methodological questions
relating to capacity building and results-based
monitoring and evaluation and indicators.
Approaches in performance measurements
applied by major agencies such as the World
Bank, DFID and CIDA were discussed against
the fundamentals that underpin the characteristics
of capacity building interventions in which
processes and outcomes are equally important.
Participants also had access to workshop
documents that included a comprehensive
review of the literature of the issue of
performance measurement with specific applications
such as guidelines for assessing performance
measurement applied by DANIDA. Case studies
and experiences were also presented and
the workshop extensively discussed key
questions in performance measurement such
as What to measure, For Whom should performance
be measured and How to develop performance
measurement indicators in capacity building.
From the plenary
discussions as well as group discussions
several ideas emerged including suggestions
on the way forward in the development of
performance measurement frameworks by ACBF
and other donors. Participants agreed that
the workshop had enabled them to acquire
a better understanding of the critical
importance of applying result-based approach
to capacity building by developing appropriate
performance measurements relevant to the
local context of interventions and other
external environment. They also agreed
that the development of performance measurement
frameworks has to be participatory and
owned by the institutions benefiting from
the interventions.
It was acknowledged
that, ACBF and other donors should facilitate
the development of performance indicators
by adopting a consultative approach that
will strike the right balance between the
need for accountability in the use of resources
and fostering learning for improved performance
of beneficiary institutions or programs.
There was also a wide consensus that while
the focus on results measurements should
go beyond measurement of inputs and short-term
results, considering the nature of capacity
building, the developmental impact is likely
to be a long-term process that cannot be
easily measured.
The workshop recognized
that, because of the diversity and complexity
of capacity building, the definitions of
a set of indicators for the evaluation
would be a complex and difficult task.
The difficulty comes from the fact that
indicators cannot capture the overall impact
of a program and it is even harder to attribute
the changes in performance of policies,
programs or institutions to the capacity
building interventions. Participants encouraged
ACBF to continue its efforts of developing
a coordinated approach to the development
of performance measurement frameworks that
will shift the emphasis of existing measurement
methodologies from inputs, process and
output to outcome and impact assessment.
Working groups enabled specific discussions
on challenges and opportunities faced by
different types of capacity building interventions
ranging from economic policy management,
public administration and civil society.
They made specific recommendations on actionable
plans that would improve their performance
and committed to support the development
of result-based measurement approaches
in development programs at the organizational
level, meso and macro-levels to ensure
sustainability of capacity building interventions
and greater impact of development efforts.
The Foundation
will pursue this collaborative effort
of developing appropriate performance
measurement frameworks by continuing
to work with other partner institutions
that are involved in the search of factors
that are affecting the success of capacity-building
interventions which could be used to
harvest outcome, impact and process indicators
for capacity building. ECDPM, UNDP, JICA,
IDRC are just a few among institutions
that have expressed interest in sharing
lessons and could possibly work with
the Foundation to organize a symposium
on performance evaluation of capacity-building
interventions sometime in the fourth
quarter of 2004. The accumulation of
experience from all those processes would
help in developing a set of indicators
that could be used by the Foundation
to strengthen the design and monitoring
of its interventions in 2005.
