Full Name (abbr.): Multilateral Aid Review
URL: http://www.dfid.gov.uk/About-DFID/Who-we-work-with/Multilateral-agencies/Multilateral-Aid-Review/
Owners: UK Department for International Development (DFID)
Target Groups: These 43 multilateral organisations:Value for money according to the review | Organisation |
---|---|
very good | Asian Development Fund (AsDF), European Commission Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection (ECHO), European Development Fund (EDF), Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation (GAVI), Global Fund to fight AIDS, TB and Malaria (GFATM), International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), International Development Association of the World Bank (IDA), Private Infrastructure Development Group (PIDG), UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) |
good | African Development Fund, Central Emergency Response Fund, Climate Investment Funds, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Fast Track Initiative for Education for All (FTI), Global Environment Facility (GEF), Global Facility for Disaster Risk Reduction (GFDRR), International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), International Finance Corporation (IFC), International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), Peace Building Fund (PBF), UNDP, UNHCR, UNITAID, WFP |
adequate | Caribbean Development Bank, European Commission budget instruments, UN Delivering As One Expanded Funding Window (EFW), Inter-American Development Bank, OHCHR, UNAIDS, UNEP, UNFPA, WHO |
poor | Commonwealth Secretariat, FAO, UN-HABITAT, ILO, IOM, UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UN-ISDR), UNESCO, UNIDO, UNIFEM |
Baseline: DFID currently funds 43 multilateral organisations to undertake a broad range of activities, such as leading the fight against HIV, malaria and TB, responding to natural disasters, providing large scale infrastructure, supporting children and women, and peacekeeping. The UK funding to multilateral organisations, and bilateral funding managed by multilateral organisations totals nearly 4 billion Pound Sterling per year.
Blueprint: This review provides DFID with the evidence needed to take decisions about how best to deliver funding through the multilateral organisations in order to make the greatest possible impact on poverty. How DFID will approach these decisions in light of the report is set out in the paper entitled Taking Forward the Findings of the Multilateral Aid Review
Actions and Resources:
Full Report of the Multilateral Aid Review
See here: http://www.unhabitat.org/downloads/docs/9543_98668_DFID_MultilateralAidReview.pdf
Jan Goossenaerts
@collaboratewiki
See the discussion in Linked In group UNESCO's Friends: DfiD gives UNESCO a yellow card:
I regretted UNESCO's yellow card, and tried to understand why UNICEF was favoured over UNESCO for DfiD's education-related priorities.
UNICEF refers to the Convention on the Rights of the Child as the mandate for its actions, looking into the details of this convention it is striking that in most articles, state parties are the guarantor of the rights, and that UNICEF's mandate is based '''directly'' only in Articles 4, 22.2 and 28.3 that mention the framework of international co-operation as an option in cases where the resources available to the state parties would not be sufficient to undertake the measures for the implementation of the rights recognized in the Convention.
UNESCO's focus, more than UNICEF's, is also on building those state parties' capacities. Institutional capacity is a more difficult area to obtain ""measurable impacts," as extensively illustrated for the health sector in The Lancet's article ''An assessment of interactions between global health initiatives and country health systems'' http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2809%2960919-3/fulltext
The recommendations of that article maybe valuable for all development stakeholders…
Maybe we should also give a yellow card to DfiD, for not having taken this into consideration?
The bottom line is that a yellow card signals something to the receiver, and must be seen as a constructive comment.
A review as done by DfiD was overdue as well, after all.
Comment based on wikiworx.info content systematization proceeding at: Multilateral Aid Review, UNESCO, UNICEF , UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, and Country Initiative Books.
Jan Goossenaerts
@collaboratewiki