1 / 16

Country Ownership in Program Design

Country Ownership in Program Design. From Principles to Practice. What is MCC?. Established in 2004, a USG Corporation Mandate: reduce poverty through growth Programs: large-scale five-year grants Partners: well governed, investing in their people, providing economic freedoms

susan-contreras
Download Presentation

Country Ownership in Program Design

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. Country Ownership in Program Design From Principles to Practice

  2. What is MCC? • Established in 2004, a USG Corporation • Mandate: reduce poverty through growth • Programs: large-scale five-year grants • Partners: well governed, investing in their people, providing economic freedoms • Independence: executive board • Principles: country ownership, accountability for results

  3. MCC partners Europe/Asia (8) Armenia Georgia Jordan Indonesia Mongolia Moldova Philippines Vanuatu Latin America (4) El Salvador Honduras Nicaragua* Africa (14) Benin Burkina Faso Cape Verde Ghana Lesotho Madagascar Malawi Mali Morocco Mozambique Namibia Senegal Tanzania Zambia

  4. MCC Programs by Sector

  5. The Principles • Local solutions, not imposed • Better governed are better bets • More willing to pursue and be accountable for programs of their own making • More willing to undertake difficult reforms • Sustainability

  6. The Early Years • MCC’s pure approach – hands off! Really? • Nationwide consultations = nationwide expectations • Partner countries’ time and political capital • Is the oatmeal too hot or too cold? • Program redesign – abandonment of principle? • Response: early engagement on a vision

  7. Bounding the Universe • Constraints analysis - finding a shared vision • Defining the world of the possible • Political economy of proposals • Defense against “pet” projects, but not enough to indentify good projects • Response: meaningful consultations

  8. So who is the “Country”? • It matters who you ask • Elite capture • Stakeholders or the usual suspects? • Meaningful consultations: from information to partnership • Country, culture and political contexts • Role of Constraints Analysis in framing

  9. Results Focused Project Design • The real stakeholders • Do they agree on the problem? • What does the ideal state look like? • What’s holding us back? • Oops, what if the problem isn’t money

  10. A more realistic ownership? • Attributes not project guidance • Sound program rationale from activities to outcomes that can be measured • Capacity – existing and opportunities • Policy environment and sustainability • Implementation risks of all types • Crowd in other actors • The list goes on… • Communication and misunderstandings

  11. IS THERE A PROJECT ? • SUPPORTIVE • POLICY • ENVIRONMENT

  12. Getting to yes • Concept papers – early heart to heart • Peer review • Grants for project development • Appraisal of findings • Negotiating compact scope

  13. Lessons along the continuum • Strong appreciation for the principle • Some frustration with the practice • Wide variety of experiences • Tensions between ownership and stewardship • Owning policies more important than programs • Ownership of implementation

  14. MCC Program Development Cycle

  15. THANK YOU

More Related