1 / 7

Report from Partner Countries Work Stream – Day 1

Report from Partner Countries Work Stream – Day 1. Room 2. SESSION 1 – PARTNER COUNTRIES, INFOMEDIARIES. Key points: Quality and frequency of data provided by DPs must be improved;

attaway
Download Presentation

Report from Partner Countries Work Stream – Day 1

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Report from Partner Countries Work Stream – Day 1 Room 2

  2. SESSION 1 – PARTNER COUNTRIES, INFOMEDIARIES • Key points: • Quality and frequency of data provided by DPs must be improved; • Awareness among both IATI signatories and non-signatories at country-level of partner country information needs must be strengthened to help the data collection efforts by partner countries; • This hinges on improvements of information flows from capitals to country-offices of IATI signatories as well as awareness raising among non-signatories by partner countries; • The IATI Registry was created to provide best possible information for improving/enriching the national data collection process, not to replace it. • Recall of the 8 points PC main messages came out from the 23 April meeting • Overview of the 3 IATI country pilots: • Diversity in the context of countries: tools used, geography, LICs/MIC mix, financial systems…

  3. SESSION 2 – IMPLEMENTATION AT COUNTRY LEVEL: RWANDA PILOT • Context : • 40-50% of national budget is financed by ODA • All ODA through Government is on budget • A dynamic mechanism to monitor aid effectiveness is in place: Donor Performance Assessment Framework; solid achievements in reforming the PFM; using DAD as AIMS – DAD is public • Rwanda is piloting AIMS-PFIMS integration process • In Rwanda, a conscious effort is underway to move forward on fiscal transparency and aid transparency simultaneously • IATI Rwanda pilot on budget alignment and automatic data exchange is underway, and results expected by Q3/2012

  4. COLOMBIA PILOT • Using a locally developed bespoke AIMS • Presentation of Colombian systems specificities; • Presentation of the Architecture of their AIMS to fit into the actual IATI and budget alignment process • Colombia IATI pilot to look at South-South flows will begin in June 2012 Challenges faced by the 2 countries: • Quality and Comprehensiveness of data (timeliness, frequency…) • Getting DPs to report according to the PC fiscal year

  5. DRC PILOT • DRC is the most advanced of the three IATI pilots, and focuses on automatic exchange between IATI Registry and the DRC AIMS (PGAI) • The DRC pilot shows that we have now moved from DEVELOPING IATI to DOING IATI • Positive results from the tests done with DFID data • Extended the process to Sweden and Global Fund; now need to extend to other DPs • Consistent contribution of the automatic data exchange to data collection means that the country process remains in place, but has been enhanced • less time for data collection, more time for verification and data analysis • More detailed, accurate, forward-looking data and better frequency

  6. SESSION 3 – THE ISSUE OF FORWARD-LOOKING DATA • Request by DPs at the meeting that PCs indicate which are the most needed data fields in view of their upcoming processes for preparation of next fiscal years’ budgets • PCs would like to have forward-looking data for the lifetime of a project, or at least 3 years ahead: • However, the focus is next year’s (n+1) data • PCs require disaggregated forward-looking data at activity/project-level rather than data that is aggregated by country (as per OECD-DAC forward spending survey) or by Ministry allocations • Forward-looking data needs to be provided in a way that fits, or can be “translated to”, the PC fiscal year

  7. OPEN DATA – OPEN GOVERNMENT – PUBLIC ACCESS • World Bank approach • Beyond data, open to the public the process (budget…) • Social accountability: feed-back from citizens on budget allocation • DG/Synergy tools: • Value-added of GIS/geo-coding and other features • Addressing AIMS-PFM systems integration • The PCs might wish to consider giving public access to their AIMS and PFM systems

More Related