IFAD first in development aid rankings – new report
The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) has just been ranked as number one by the highly regarded and influential Quality of Official Development Assistance Report which evaluated the capacity of 49 countries and multilateral agencies to deliver impactful long-term assistance to countries in need.
The annual report produced by the Center for Global Development measures and compares the indicators that matter most to development effectiveness and impact.
“IFAD’s high ranking is a testament to the importance we place on ensuring that every dollar spent has a long-term impact on tackling the hunger and poverty experienced by the world’s most vulnerable people,” said Gilbert F. Houngbo, President of IFAD. “It also highlights the transparency of our funding model, the alignment of our work with countries’ own development priorities, and the importance we attach to evaluating our work.”
Development
The report measures 17 indicators based on evidence of ODA impact and internationally agreed principles, including the prioritisation of funds for long-term development and for those most in need. IFAD scored particularly high on the quality of its evaluation systems, and the extent to which it promotes domestic ownership and use of national systems.
“This report confirms to IFAD’s donors that their investments are delivered to the highest levels of development effectiveness,” said Houngbo.
IFAD’s close partners the African Development Fund and World Bank’s International Development Association took second and third place respectively in the rankings.
Based on overall rankings, multilateral agencies generally outperformed bilateral donors, and the report concludes that using the multilateral system can support development effectiveness and ensure funding reaches those who are in greatest need. It also states that “multilaterals are particularly well-placed to help countries respond to COVID-19, with global reach, broad mandates and expertise, an array of financing instruments, and knowledge of local contexts.”
