● In the Event of an Obligation to Accumulate ∙ Bilateral grant aid conducted by MOFA consists mainly of foreign-currency assistance for the purchase of goods or materials such as ∙ While bilateral grant aid projects are of great significance in terms of diplomatic strategy, there are limitations to reviewing each ∙ Some of the verification items contained in the evaluation criteria and contents of analysis are redundant.● Scope∙ Projects shall have two evaluation criteria, “Relevance ∙ “Appropriateness of Processes” shall be included ∙ The rating method shall encourage the explicit indication of the basis for “Lessons Learned.”∙ Four-level ratings are proposed, as are used for MOFA’s policy-level ODA evaluations and JICA’s grant aid post-project evaluations. However, individual evaluation reports shall not use four-level alphabetical ratings such as “A” through “D.”∙ The basic set of project documents shall be provided ● BackgroundCounterpart Funds*∙ These shall essentially be included among the targets Background and Scope of Work● Ratings● Project Documents and Materialsprojects conducted by MOFA.Chief AnalystSenior AdvisorConsultantIn evaluating individual bilateral grant aid projects implemented by MOFA over the past three years, the same methodology has been used as when evaluating ODA policies. However, both evaluation teams and project stakeholders have pointed out numerous incongruences and issues with the use of this methodology for the evaluation of individual projects due to the following characteristics.Economic and Social Development Programs and is positioned as “aid that must be implemented in close coordination with diplomatic policies and may require flexibility.” The nature of the projects is therefore different from that of those implemented by JICA.project’s diplomatic impact and quantitative effects.To propose an evaluation framework and methodology fully in line with the characteristics of individual bilateral grant aid of Plans” and “Effectiveness of Implementation and Results.”within the evaluation questions for “Relevance of Plans” and “Effectiveness of Implementation and Results,” instead of as an independent evaluation criterion. Processes should also be checked for factors such as their transparency.∙ “Diplomatic Viewpoints” shall be merged with Verification “Development items for “Diplomatic shall be merged with “Relevance of Plans,” and verification items for “Diplomatic Impact” with “Effectiveness of Implementation and Results.”of evaluation. However, while evaluation sub-questions shall be posed separately from “accumulation” and “application/projects,” and the actual “application/Viewpoints.” Importance” SATO Kan HiroshiChief Senior Researcher, Research Operations Department, IDE-JETROProf. INADA JuichiSchool of Economics, Senshu UniversityInternational Development Center of Japan Incorporated* Funds accumulated by the government of the recipient country as the proceeds from the sale of the goods or materials procured through the grant aid. These funds can be used for projects, the procurement of goods or materials, etc. that will contribute to economic and social development in the recipient country based on deliberations on their application with the Government of Japan.projects” shall be subjects of study, considering that the Government of Japan does not make “immediate use” a requirement, whether to include them among the targets of evaluation and rating shall be deliberated separately for each project.immediately after evaluators under a strict obligation of confidentiality.contracting with third-party Analysis of Third-Party Evaluations of Bilateral Grant Aid Projects Conducted by MOFA and Proposal of Evaluation MethodsMain Points of Proposed New Evaluation Methods● Evaluation Criteria21Annual Report on Japanʼs ODA Evaluation 2021
元のページ ../index.html#22