Bread for the World Institute, part of the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network (MFAN)
Bread for the World—a member of the MFAN coalition-- conducts policy research and analysis to inform U.S. policy makers on global development issues, including on development effectiveness and development cooperation.
Which is the most significant and paradigmatic story of a development
partnership that you have experienced?
Since its creation in 2008, MFAN has worked with the last two administrations, Congress, and the development community to advance a reform agenda to make U.S. development assistance be more effective and responsive to the needs of people in developing countries.
The past two U.S. administrations successfully created a strong bipartisan record on global development cooperation by building on their predecessor’s initiatives. The creation of the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), and the President’s Malaria Initiative (PMI) under President Bush represented new, data-driven, and results-based approaches to aid and were sustained and expanded under President Obama. More recent initiatives such as Feed the Future and Power Africa are using aid dollars to leverage private resources, vastly increasing the reach and impact of U.S. foreign assistance.
How was the process of Monitoring this Development Partnership?
Bread for the World Institute provides nonpartisan policy analysis on hunger and strategies to end it. The Institute has been educating opinion leaders, policymakers, and the public about hunger in the United States and abroad since 1975.
Bread for the World works with various coalition partners to make development effectiveness a core objective of development assistance, including the call for harmonized and coordinated Official Development Assistance (ODA). Part of this work is done in partnership with the MFAN Coalition
In 2011, ahead of the Busan Partnership for economic Development co-operation, Bread for the World Institute published a policy paper outlining the need for better informed U.S. and global policy to achieve development cooperation. The paper is titled “Making Development Assistance Work Better”, and is available online as PDF.
In 2015, the Institute participated in the Third International Financing for Development Conference (FfD), in Addis Ababa. Bread for the World co-hosted a roundtable after the conference to share main messages from the conference with other U.S.-based CSO partners. Lessons learned and shared from the conference are helping to shape CSO partners’ engagement on financing the 2030 agenda. Bread for the World Institute prepared and launched a policy briefing paper at the FfD conference, Strengthening Local Capacity: The Weak Link in Sustainable Development, which highlights the need for strengthening local capacity and institutions to deliver the ambitious promise of the ambitious 2030 Agenda. It is available online as PDF.
What type of monitoring of government-led DPs is occurring in your country?
Bread for the World Institute is an advocacy organization that does not implement programs. It conducts policy research and analysis to influence U.S. government policies and programs on global development. Through its advocacy efforts including with coalition partners like MFAN, Bread informs U.S. policy makers through open discussions, including high-level meetings and consultations with members of Congress, the White House, and other government agencies.
Open to all stakeholders,
and include their ideas
Open to all stakeholders, but doesn’t include their ideas
Open to a few, chosen stakeholders, and include their ideas
Open to a few, chosen stakeholders, but does not include their ideas
Not open at all
Which are the actors or development agents that had participated in
the Development partnership that you describe in this story?
How could you define the dialogue process between the
multistakeholders involved in the Development Partnership?
Lack of proper listening, cycling the same arguments, no learning.
Encouraging listening and taking voices into account
Could you explain how the four-development effectiveness principles were used
as monitoring criteria in the experience you are presenting?
By clicking on the round circles in the graphic you could read more about how the principle has been used.
Key Primary Tool
Principle not used in the monitoring
"As part of this effort, Bread for the World Institute and its MFAN coalition partners have focused on articulating country ownership as a core pillar of development effectiveness. The MFAN Working Group on Country Ownership was constituted to foster a more complete and robust conversation about country ownership. The Working Group has worked to define country ownership, suggest methods to measure progress towards meeting ownership objectives, and propose a more practical and enhanced set of guidelines to advance the country ownership principle within the U.S. global development agenda."
“The new integrated approach and the localisation of SDGs and other international commitments into the national development framework were from the realisation of low focus of results despite making economic progress (macro indicators) and aims to reducing wastage, focus on high impact national priorities but also human development."
"MFAN policy recommendations to promote country ownership highlight the need to channel resources directly through local partners. Recommendations include:
• Percentage of U.S. aid alignment with partner country priorities, systems, and procedures by program funding levels
• Degree of conceptual alignment between a country’s national development strategy and the U.S. country plan of operation
• Percentage of alignment between U.S. program funding and regionally agreed development plans and priorities such as the Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Program (CAADP)
• Percentage of on-budget and general budget U.S. funding to partner countries at the national, sub-national, and local levels.
• Percentage of program objectives that were derived from and/or aligned with country development plans and policies
• Number of formal joint decision-making mechanisms between U.S. agencies and local institutions and actors."
"MFAN focuses on country ownership, transparency and accountability because these are core pillars of effective development cooperation. Their interaction enables leaders and citizens in developing countries to take responsibility for their own development. This includes guiding spending priorities, making evidence-based conclusions about what works and what doesn’t, and holding country leaders as well as donors accountable for delivering results. MFAN believes that informed and empowered citizens who demand good governance and sound priorities, and act as a check against corruption, will bring about lasting change in their countries."
See more here.
Ownership of development priorities by developing counties
Recipient countries define the development model that they want to implement.
Focus on results
Having a sustainable impact should be the driving force behind investments and effort in development policy making
Partnerships for development
Development depends on the participation of all actors, and recognises the diversity and complementarity of their functions.
Transparency and shared responsibility
Development co-operation must be transparent and accountable to all citizens.
How did the government or other stakeholders react after
you have presented the monitoring initiative/some monitoring results?
Monitoring experiences from CSOs like the one in my story happen in my country...
“Every five years but also during reviews of the plans usually mid-term i.e after 3years. Further to this multi-stakeholder technical reference groups are usually setup to monitor development results on a number of national program areas..."
Which capacities do you consider as key in order to realise this monitoring experience?
Capacity to relate, by participation in coalitions and networks of CSOs to engage engaging at multiple levels,
with the community and a variety of stakeholders
Capacity to foster dialogue with government and other stakeholder. Convene around a common landscape
Communication and outreach capacity. Counting with media in reaching and influencing public opinion.
Capacity to conduct evidence-based research and policy papers.
Capacity to commit and act, through a well-elaborated strategy for lobby and advocacy.
Capacity to conduct Lobby and Advocacy representing right-holders, from a legitimate, accountable and trustworthy representation.
Capability to mobilise public support and create and maintain operational space. Contributing to the public debate and maintain legitimacy of representation.
Capability to ensure organisational sustainability (with financial sustainability and capability to attract and retain qualified staff)
Capacity to adapt and renew, pro-act to changing external contexts. Organizations should be able to monitor changing circumstances and respond accordingly.
Capacity of culture of learning and innovation in the organisation. Developing an own learning agenda
Local Context understanding, Mainstreaming of gender, environment and disability, Coordination and M & E.
Which are, in your opinion, the capacities needed to conduct a good monitoring of Development partnerships?
• Better indicators on development partnerships, based on country realities
• Training on effective methods to evaluate impact of advocacy
• Resources to facilitate assessment of research analysis and advocacy
• Reliable data on in-country financial and management systems
• Evaluation of donor-funded programs by “beneficiaries” for mutual accountability purposes
To which extent has this experience been articulated through networks and
shared at regional level in other countries?
Bread for the World Institute’s work I development partnerships includes facilitating north-south learning though roundtables, field visits and meetings with governments and civil society actors to strengthen mutual-learning. One such ongoing partnership is with the Organization of African Instituted Churches (OAIC). OAIC is a grassroots movement across Africa focusing on food security and nutrition. In partnership with partners in the global north, Bread for the World Institute provides a forum for partners from the global south bring perspectives into policy-making forums to Washington. One such opportunity is the World Bank annual meetings, to ensure that Washington-based advocacy groups hear from and share views with partners in the global south.
Which is the projection of the organisation/network at the moment
in their national and international context?
Bread for the World Institute educates the public and U.S. policy makers on the need for improved
coordination, country-ownership and harmonizing of development cooperation and finance. Bread for the World works closely with both Congress and the White House to ensure that development cooperation—both financial and non-financial—responds to the needs and aligns with countries’ priorities. Bread for the World has closely engaged in the development process of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including providing input into various work streams that were incorporated into broader strategies on the adoption of the SDGs. Bread continues to shape and influence the U.S. government’s role in ensuring that the SDG framework becomes embedded in global development—both in the application of specific goals, as well as in the overall Means of Implementation (MOI) of the
Bread for the World Institute’s analysis informs a broader set of development actors including multilateral institutions. As part of the InterAction G7/G20 Working Groups, Bread for the World provides timely advise to U.S. government and global leaders to adhere to global norms on development cooperation and effectiveness.
In 2015, the Institute released two policy papers on the role of effective aid in helping developing countries improve local governance, strengthen local capacity, and raise their own financial resources to achieve the SDGs. These papers were timed with the adoption of the SDGs to stimulate thought leadership among the aid community about what it will take to achieve the new global goals.