● Review of Past ODA Evaluations (Country Assistance Evaluations) and Study of Country Assistance ● Analysis of Third-Party Evaluations of Bilateral Grant Aid Projects Conducted by MOFA and Proposal Evaluation Methodologiesof Evaluation Methodsfollowing are examples of actions in response to the five ODA evaluations conducted in FY2020.* The African Business Education Initiative for Youth is an industrial human-resource development initiative for young people in Africa. The program provides opportunities for young Africans to pursue master’s degrees at Japanese universities and take part in internships at Japanese enterprises.MOFA has formulated specific actions in response to the respective recommendations made in each ODA evaluation. The The Evaluation of Japan’s ODA to Brazil recommends enhanced dialogue among countries involved in triangular cooperation. MOFA will continue to engage in regular consultations with the Brazilian Cooperation Agency and hold discussions on overall policy. It will also consider establishing a joint system for regular monitoring among the three countries in order to respond flexibly to changes in the circumstances of projects currently underway.The Evaluation of Japan’s ODA to Mongolia recommends the enhancement of measures to reduce risks posed by frequent personnel reassignment. MOFA will hold discussions with officials on the Mongolian side in order to develop a mechanism by which the results and knowledge already obtained can be accurately passed on in the event that personnel are reassigned while a project is in progress, as well as devising means of transferring technologies.The Evaluation of Japan’s ODA to Rwanda recommends that Japan should facilitate collaboration with various actors, including Japanese companies. In response, MOFA will continue to promote the ABE Initiative* and technical cooperation projects in the ICT sector in order to nurture pro-Japanese experts in Rwanda and facilitate the establishment of networks between enterprises in the two countries.The Evaluation of the Economic and Social Development Program in Jordan in FY2015 recommends the implementation of effective public relations. For similar future projects, MOFA will strive to create publications that explain the diplomatic significance of the project in an easily understandable manner incorporating regional diplomacy and global development issues and that go beyond describing that particular project to showcase the state of Japan’s refugee relief and humanitarian assistance as a responsible member of the international community.The Evaluation of the Economic and Social Development Program in Mozambique in FY2017 recommends the improvement of monitoring after delivery of the procured product. Recognizing the difficulty of post-project verification of the effects of using expendable or consumable items, in similar future projects, MOFA will strive to confirm the usage conditions of the procured product and achievement of results by making advance requests for submission of reports from the recipient country’s government.In addition to the five ODA evaluations, a “Review of Past ODA Evaluations (Country Assistance Evaluations) and Study of Country Assistance Evaluation Methodologies” and “Analysis of Third-Party Evaluations of MOFA’s Individual Bilateral Grant Aid Projects and Proposal of Evaluation Methods” were also conducted in FY2020. These were aimed at examining better ways of conducting future Country Assistance Evaluations and evaluations of individual grant aid projects, respectively, based on past results.This study recommended that the timing of implementation of Country Assistance Evaluations be adjusted so that it is easier to reflect their results in policies. It also proposed that since alphabetical or numeric ratings improve the ease of understandability but can also prevent the subjects of evaluation from perceiving the evaluation results in a constructive manner, in light of the goal of ratings, the presentation format of evaluation results should be determined with consideration for both of these factors. In response to these recommendations, when selecting target countries for Country Assistance Evaluations in FY2021, priority was given to countries whose Country Development Cooperation Policy will be revised in the following fiscal year. Also, the decision was made to stop using alphabetical ratings and present evaluation results in the form of comments only starting in FY2021.In light of the characteristics of individual bilateral grant aid projects, the report proposed that “Development Viewpoints” and “Diplomatic Viewpoints” be merged; that only two evaluation criteria, “Relevance of Plans” and “Effectiveness of Implementation and Results,” be used; that evaluation teams create an “Evaluation Outline” summarizing basic information on the project instead of requiring the objective framework used for policy-level evaluations; and that ratings be kept to four levels as before but not use an alphabetical format. Based on these proposals, the decision was made to adopt the new evaluation criteria and methodology for evaluations implemented in FY2021 and later. Actions in Response to Recommendations Studies of Evaluation Methodologies/Frameworks07Annual Report on Japanʼs ODA Evaluation 2021
元のページ ../index.html#8