Sections:

• Home
• ABOUT DFID
  • History
  • Mission statement
  • Ministers & organisation
  • Millennium Development Goals
  • How DFID works in the UK
  • Who DFID works with
  • Development activities
  • Performance & expenditure
  • Key achievements
  • Evaluation
  • Diversity & equality
  • Expenditure statistics
• FIGHTING POVERTY
• COUNTRY PROFILES
• NEWSROOM
• PUBLICATIONS
• CASE STUDIES
• PROCUREMENT
• CONSULTATIONS
• POLICY AND RESEARCH
• FUNDING SCHEMES
• RECRUITMENT
• DISCOVERY ZONE
• GET INVOLVED

Management Board | Development Committee | Audit Committee | Human Resources Committee

DFID Management Board

Membership | Terms of Reference | Minutes of Meetings

Minutes of the Management Board Meeting January 2004

In working towards the delivery of the Public Service Agreement and Service Delivery Agreement, the Management Board will aim to: communicate the vision, role, direction and priorities of DFID to staff and other stakeholders;

ensure DFID's financial resources and staff are allocated and managed effectively;

monitor and improve DFID's performance;

protect and enhance DFID's reputation as a highly effective international development organisation.

Attendees:

Observing:

.Staff in 1 Palace Street, Abercrombie House and (at a maximum) 8 overseas offices

Finance & Corporate Performance Division

1. Richard Calvert highlighted three particular successes over the past year as:

a) good management and oversight of DFID's resources, in particular spending targets were met; and pressures successfully responded to including Iraq and meeting 0.33% oda/gni target;

b) strengthened Corporate strategy and performance framework, in particular the PSA is driving performance;

c) a strengthened external accountability including statistics reporting to DAC; work with Parliament (IDC and PAC) and clear accurate non-qualified resource accounts. These have all served to strengthen our external reputation.

2. The main challenges over the coming year would be:

a) joining-up both within the Division, and across the service divisions, in provision of support and guidance on compliance issues, as well as on the development of IT systems through ARIES;

b) greater emphasis on customer focus. Restructuring Division - appointing 2 deputy-directors for corporate strategy and programme delivery and support respectively; and

c) making sure we have the right people with the right skills - this is the single biggest risk to delivery in the Division.

3. In discussion the following points were made:

a) This was a well presented Plan, which reflected a good performance in the Division over the year. Looking ahead, it would be important to sharpen the focus on the value for money PSA target for which the Finance Director was responsible and in particular its project scoring component. While the Division's restructuring gives greater clarity on who will take this forward, there was still a need for the Director to develop a strategy to improve portfolio quality (PSA target) whilst accepting delivery responsibility lay with others. Programme delivery skills supported by strengthened guidance and lesson learning were key to improving performance in this area. This should be given more prominence in the Director's DDP deliverables.

b) The Board welcomed the planned further work on the Administration Costs Review and the strategic overview it would provide and agreed this should include benchmarking on the costs involved in maintaining various degrees of internal management information. The review would be useful in informing tough decisions between priorities as non-programme resources became tighter. The Board also agreed that it was important to control the cost of administration capital more closely.

c) There was recognition that DFID needed to develop stronger financial management skills across the office. An assessment of this, using a CIPFA model, will be undertaken in the coming year that should allow benchmarking and identify ways forward.

d) The re-write of Office Instructions had been delayed due to gaps in staffing - there is now a team in place to take this forward. Revised OIs were expected to be completed by autumn this year, with some interim outputs for the start of the new financial year, and would be central to achieving a number of the Division's forward plans. The Director was asked to consider a more proactive approach to reallocating resources within his department to meet critical gaps and ensure timetables are met.

e) The development of the Quarterly Management Report was welcomed. This would improve the quality of management information the Board sees and become a stronger analytical tool.

f) Improved compliance with internal systems and procedures will require buy-in from other Divisions. This would be secured in two ways - by ensuring the basic design of these systems is sound and meets the needs of the office, and by smarter communications. This entails the Division developing a stronger communication strategy, where internal and external messages are consistent.

g) The Board commended the Division's approach to improving skills, especially the need to up skill without increasing costs. This should be a model for other Divisions. There was also a need to increasingly target external recruitment and market DFID as a good place for finance professionals in Whitehall to work, as well as promoting it internally as an attractive posting for existing DFID staff.. The Board had a role in supporting this.

h) The risks of financial exposure posed by CDC were now largely managed through an agreement in principle just reached with the Treasury. The DFID programme should be adequately protected against the adverse impact of fluctuating CDC performance.

4. The following action points were agreed:

Finance Director to develop a strategy to improve portfolio quality (PSA target);

Administration Costs Review should benchmark the costs involved in maintaining various degrees of internal management information;

Finance Director should consider a more proactive approach to reallocating resources within his department to meet critical gaps and ensure timetables are met;

Director to develop a stronger communication strategy for the Division covering internal and external communications; · Director with support of Management Board to promote Finance Division as a good place to work.

Human Resources Division

5. Dave Fish highlighted four main achievements from the past year:

a) the HR database, which was now producing results including accurate payment of overseas staff. This had been seen as a groundbreaking project by other Whitehall Departments;

b) successes in strengthening relations with other Divisions including the partnership agreement with Africa Division; support to EMAD with MIC restructuring and work with establishing the new Policy Division;

c) steady progress on diversity issues: there had been a large number of successful female candidates in last promotion round; opportunities for local staff were continuing to develop;

d) the new promotion process had been a success; the cluster posting system had been a success in administrative terms, although poor forecasting of staff requirements had resulted in an unacceptably high vacancy rates across DFID.

6. The main challenges over the coming year would be:

a) the need to ensure the implementation of the HR database was completed successfully and that the expected benefits were delivered;

b) implementation of the efficiency measures identified by the HR benchmarking exercise;

c) agreement of the new pay deal for staff below the SCS.

7. The discussion recognised the extensive and challenging change agenda facing the Division. There had been good performance in delivery of the HR database but over the coming year there would need to be a real focus on delivering the benefits, not least in the level of management information available.

8. It was agreed that the promotions system had delivered good people and recognition that the number of vacancies, a corporate-wide issue, was a collective responsibility. Forecasting of staff requirements was a key issue. The HR Director was encouraged to continue his strategy for improving proactive HR staff inputs to other Divisions, particularly when forecasting exercises were being undertaken. A more strategic response to skills shortages particularly for filling key vacancies and increasing the skills base without increasing costs was needed. It was critical that ideas continued to be developed for filling "difficult to fill" posts. Stronger more widely available vacancy analysis was needed.

9. There was also a question as to whether HR was adequately aligned with the business and comparisons made with the World Bank - should there be dedicated HR support within each division? The strategic relationships, which had been developed with other divisions, were welcomed. There should be wider acceptance of the shared responsibility on HR issues between HRD and other divisions.

10. Progress on diversity has been good but we needed to avoid complacency, still more needs to be done if we are to meet our targets. For example we need to do more to make progress on disability targets. There had been early interesting results from the HR benchmarking exercise, which reinforced the need to continue to move HR Division into a more strategic role and reduce the amount of staff time on servicing day-to-day transaction activities. Security of staff offices, people and access to classified information was also raised as an important area over the coming year where more focus would be needed - an area where the HR and Information, Communication and Knowledge Directors held shared responsibility.

11. The Management Board were keen to record their appreciation of the huge effort made by the Division to recruit 200 people across 15 specialisms over the past year. A special mention was also made of the Overseas Pensions Department and the consistently excellent performance both in delivery and management as evidenced by the IIP review.

12. The following action points were agreed, to be prioritised:

HR strategy - to consider a more radical approach moving HR upstream, aligning it closer to business needs, perhaps devolving some resources direct to Divisions to manage HR issues, and simplification of business processes and procedures to reduce transaction costs. The strategy should be informed by findings of the benchmarking exercise;

HR Database - to deliver the expected benefits of and progress on the HR database including quantifying savings that should be realised in administration costs;

Staff vacancies - to ensure proactive vacancy management with regular reporting. This should include a widely available vacancy analysis linked to a 12-month recruitment plan setting out net additions and replacements to the organisation and whether short-term actions were consistent with a more medium term view on the growth rate and size of the organisation; to continue efforts to increase organisational flexibility through up-skilling existing staff with key generic skills such as governance; to develop ideas and options for filling "difficult to fill posts";

Management Board and Directors' away day in February to discuss staff shortfalls and organisational growth restraints that need to be taken into account.

Information Division

13. Owen Barder highlighted three main achievements from the past year:

a) increased divisional engagement with users (including establishing users' groups, extending helpdesk hours, Catalyst);

b) high quality external communications over a difficult year (change of ministers etc); and

c) improved information systems (insight, remote working, award-winning video conferencing).

14. The main challenges over the coming year would be:

a) mainstreaming communications to improve delivery;

b) further improving systems (including remote working overseas, QUEST roll-out, introduction of Outlook);

c) Doing the Knowledge - articulating what this meant;

d) addressing increased security concerns; and

e) Data protection/ Freedom of Information Act.

15. The Management Board endorsed this plan, which was thought to be admirably concise. The Board particularly recognised the significant progress made over the course of the first year of the Division's existence - and the contribution made by the support staff in the Division. The work to increase staff ownership of the Plan and to achieve a 'clear line of sight' between personal and Divisional objectives was welcomed.

16. The Board further congratulated Information Division on achieving the deliverables listed above. Members encouraged the Director to clarify which were the key deliverables and indicators for the next year from the long list in the Plan - and so ensure focus for his work. The Board questioned whether Information Division adequately prioritised the demands for information and support it made on other Divisions. The Board also questioned the relative lack of coverage of CATALYST in the DDP review whilst recognising that the programme was an organisation-wide change programme, which other Divisions should have reflected in their risk matrices. The Board awayday with Directors and Chief Advisers could include strengthening ownership of the CATALYST programme.

17. The Board welcomed the clarity on division of labour on security: HRD would lead on physical/staff security; Information Division would lead on security of information. This split would need to be kept under review to ensure it was effective.

18. The Board noted the need for a balance between developing new IT infrastructure and maintaining the resilience of current systems. The Director commented there was insufficient standardisation or central control over DFID systems - this was essential if systems were to be properly managed. He would need the support of senior management to improve this. The Board agreed there needed to be a debate about the costs, management and implications for standards of centralisation.

19. The Director noted the need for a step change on both internal and external communication. There was a growing recognition of the importance of this around the organisation and all DDPs had a communications annex, though these were of varying quality. The Board recognised that the Grid had been a useful development in strengthening external communications, but there was more to do. The emphasis on increasing public awareness of DFID was endorsed. This should be supported by an increased focus on strengthening coherence between internal and external communications to ensure that all staff were on-message. Reflecting on what the Division could do better, the Director noted the planned SLA review of office services over the coming year. The Board welcomed the review and noted the role of the FAC in managing performance against the SLAs.

20. The Board supported the Director's ideas on bringing together management information so we can manage delivery across the organisation and challenge performance. Finance Division are taking work forward on this as part of developing the Quarterly Management Report.

21. The following action points were agreed:

there was a need for ISSD to focus on the resilience of core IT systems and for a corporate debate around further standardisation of IT infrastructure - and around what standards we adopt;

need to keep division of labour between information and HR on security issues under review;

a review of Information Division's SLAs (Office Services and ISSD) The FAC should take on a more active role in monitoring SLAs to deliver greater efficiency;

MB/Directors/CAs awayday to include promoting greater corporate ownership of CATALYST;

Information Director to clarify which are the key deliverables and indicators for the next year from the long list in the Plan - and so ensure focus for his work;

to improve links between internal and external communications. WE needed to ensure consistency across DIFD on the message given to other on issues where there is a corporate lineA key priority is for staff to be "on message" so that personal views do not undermine broader efforts;

operation of the Grid to be reviewed;

Director to be more proactive and consultative in prioritising demands on other Divisions.

22. International Division

Peter Grant highlighted the three key achievements from last year:

a) the paper on a vision of the international system set a strategic architecture for DFID's international work;

b) the work over the past year on the EC, including mobilising member-states on inclusion of development in the draft European Constitution and work with OGDs on the UK Action Plan; and

c) humanitarian work: on the policy side, work on Good Humanitarian Donorship principles and work to join up the UN Secretariat and the UN's delivery institutions; and in practice, DFID's continuing effective and speedy response (the Iran earthquake being an example).

23. Challenges for the Division over the coming year would be:

a) progress against those PSA targets where there has been slippage. These were the targets on EC spend in LICs and the trade target following the failure at Cancun;

b) improving effectiveness of the international system. ID would roll out new tools to measure and monitor multilateral effectiveness across the key multilaterals and feed these into new ISPs. Two key ISPs would be produced over the next 12 months, for the UNDP and for the World Bank; and

c) a successful outcome for the negotiations on IDA-14. These represented a key opportunity to improve the effectiveness of multilateral spending on development. A central issue would be the split between multilateral and bilateral contributions.

24. Other themes for the next year were likely to be:

improved working with other parts of DFID, OGDs and other donors;

developing a coherent communications strategy for the Division's objectives and work - much of International Division's work is influencing so communications are key;

preparatory work for the UK Presidencies in 2005 of the EU and the G8; and · managing the UNCD relocation to AH.

25. The Board thanked the International Director for a very clear presentation of successes and future challenges. The DDP provided a clear explanation of how he would maintain an overview of such a broad agenda and the in-year management arrangements to deliver this. Board members recognised that the Division had done some cutting-edge work on a number of issues, for example multilateral effectiveness. They congratulated staff in the Division for their work over the past year, particularly CHAD for continuing to deliver under great pressure. Further attention would be needed on the challenge of post-conflict reconstruction over the coming year (this was not discussed by the Board as it had been covered in depth in Development Committee discussions earlier in the week). ITD was also congratulated for the work that went into the WTO Ministerial meeting in Cancun (despite the disappointing outcome); and the Board recognised the challenge facing UNCD on their relocation.

26. The Board noted that the Division faced a potentially huge stretch over the next year, so prioritisation would be key. The PSA would be the main tool for ensuring focus. The institutional effectiveness agenda would also provide focus; teams would work with those institutions with the greatest impact/ influence. Windows of opportunity would appear over the year - in this respect, focus would be driven by major events.

 

27. The Division had produced a number of analytical pieces - the 'vision' paper, and the paper on multilateral effectiveness - which were useful products and which had involved much consultation. Agreement was now needed on what outcomes could be expected from this work and how these were being taken forward. We need to be clearer on the issues where we wanted to reach closure and to set a clear timetable, including interim targets for when this should be achieved.

28. The PSA target on improving the poverty focus of the EC would be a priority. There were strong political forces against this. The outcome of negotiations on the Financial Perspective would be key to achieving more rational allocation of resources to LICs. The Board appreciated the importance of improving the effectiveness of EC aid to MICs but this should not detract from the primacy of the 70% target. There was a real risk that under the UK Presidency the EDF would be 'budgetised' and there would be no increase in the resource allocation to LICs. The Board encouraged the Director to look at how we might manage this risk and what role they might play to support efforts in this area.

29. The PSA trade target was not achievable under current circumstances. It was agreed that business as usual would not produce results. Board members welcomed the clear and encouraging description given of DFID's trade strategy. Communicating this to Other Government Departments would be key to securing broader Whitehall buy-in. The Board recognised the role they would need to play in implementing the strategy, particularly in terms of influencing across Whitehall and in raising the awareness of the importance of this target with Ministers. One way of achieving this would be through focusing on trade on Ministerial overseas visits - to raise awareness of country-based approaches to trade issues. A more systematic approach to briefing Ministers for these trips was needed - Nicola would take this forward at the Regional/International Divisions meeting in February.

30. International Division currently has a vacancy rate of 20%. The Board encouraged the Director to take a more flexible approach in deploying staff to support major priorities something that was more practically possible in his Division compared with some of the Regional Divisions. Further discussions were needed on staffing - a contingency plan should be developed, as this vacancy rate would not disappear overnight.

31. The International DDP risk register had double the number of risks covered in other DDPs. The Director agreed to look at ways of reducing this number and focusing on those risks that could be actively managed. ID would discuss with the Regional Divisions approaches to joint cross-divisional risks.

32. The following action points were agreed:

set a clear timetable for issues where we wanted to reach closure - with interim benchmarks of progress;

the Director to look at how to manage the risk of EDF budgetisation and potential limitations on increased resource allocation to LICs under the UK Presidency of the EU;

International Division to consider how to raise awareness of the trade target among Ministers, including through focusing on trade on overseas visits;

DFID's strategy on trade to be set out in an accessible form for OGDs, NGOs etc - and be linked to clear deliverables. A DFID-wide communications strategy should be developed;

DG programmes to consider how trade issues can be more systematically incorporated in Ministerial county programme visits.

International Division to take a more flexible approach in deploying staff to support major priorities - with a view to eventually developing a contingency plan; and

Director to look at ways of reducing the overall number of risks and focusing on those that could be actively managed. ID would discuss with the Regional Divisions approaches to joint cross-divisional risks.

Policy Division

33. Sharon White highlighted the three key priorities over the forthcoming year:

a) prioritisation - there was a wide demand for PD services;

b) coherence with country programmes. There was an increasing agenda coming from Ministers. Were the boundaries right between the central policy work and country policy?

c) remaining organisational issues for PD including management arrangements, Chief Advisers' role and availability of a standing capacity.

34. The Management Board endorsed the Review, which was thought to be very good, providing coherent analysis and vision for the new Policy Division. The summary and highlights section were a model which others might follow. The Board also congratulated the team on that day's Spotlight notice setting out a clear sense of the Division's priorities and deliverables. It was agreed that a key deliverable was to get the new Division to work differently - excellent progress was being made. There was clear recognition of the major achievement of creating the new Policy Division with agreed work plans, budgets and a clear delivery agenda looking forward. The Division had made real progress in producing high quality products valued by country teams. The new research strategy will be critically important for MDG delivery. The Board also recognised the positive response to and a deepening relationship with other parts of Whitehall (including No.10). Staff were to be congratulated on this. However, the planned proportion of the Divisions resource (50%) to be dedicated to engaging on Whitehall issues was thought to be rather high. The Director explained that this might be misleading as many Whitehall issues were also part of DFID's core agenda.

35. Prioritisation of the numerous competing demands on the Division was a challenge. The PD team set out some interesting and challenging criteria for prioritisation of new policy work. The Board supported in particular: · an upstream focus on 3 or 4 key development questions which would unlock progress on the MDGs and which could be the key focus areas for deeper engagements with other parts of Whitehall;

reconciliation of the country-led approach with promoting high level policy issues;

consideration of whether DFID has the intellectual comparative advantage in an area;

consideration of where DFID engagement might enhance Whitehall coherence.

36. The Board agreed that it would be useful to further clarify the division of labour between Policy Division and the Regional Policy Divisions. On management issues there was recognition of the continued need to enhance management capacity, particularly at the team leader level. The Management Board strongly endorsed the need to reduce the long-hours culture in Policy Division and ongoing work on managing split-team working was valuable. Work was about to start on a clarifying the relative roles of Chief Advisers and PD management staff - this was one of the loose ends, which needed to be tied up after the reorganisation. The Board raised the need for re-location of staff to Abercrombie House to be built into work plans.

37. The PD team was confident they could deliver on the DDP, though this was stretching. The Board noted that continuing ad hoc demands for support and briefing were inevitable and that some "slack" needed to be built into work programmes to accommodate this. The Division's budgetary contingency provision was particularly welcomed by the Board given the extremely limited central contingency reserve over the coming year. On the staffing side increased flexibility was needed and should be encouraged, including through broadening the skill-base of PD staff. Some prioritisation of deliverables would also be needed so that non-critical deadlines were identified and activities in these areas could, if need be, be delayed in the face of other more pressing demands. The issue of scarce resources in particular areas was an organisation-wide issue. The Board identified this as an area of concern for further work.

38. The following action points were agreed:

work to strengthen linkage between deliverables and meeting PSA objective;

DG Policy and International to chair an office-wide discussion to secure buy-in to wider Whitehall agenda issues;

Board along with PD Director to take forward discussion on prioritisation with Ministers;

Policy Division Director to consider where to focus Division's effort on developing new policy;

clarify standing capacity required for core business;

continue to develop approaches to increase staff flexibility to meet changing needs;

ensure planning for relocation is incorporated into forward team plans;

continue action on bedding down financial systems and strengthening capacity at team leader level.

Asia Division

39. Martin Dinham highlighted key progress made over the past year:

68 per cent of DDP annual indicators on-track at mid-year (significant number of these high impact, high challenge areas);

innovative approaches to policy challenges: drivers of change analyses; migration conference; response to conflict;

strong partnerships with Japan and World Bank (exceeding expectations);

initiatives on effective staff management and diversity.

40. Challenges for the Divisions over the forthcoming year:

addressing the two off-track PSA targets (TB and Maternal Mortality);

managing a rapidly growing programme in Asia, with static administration resources, given the time-lag before programmes can be re-prioritised and staff re-deployed;

responsiveness in high profile conflict situations (Afghanistan, Nepal);

financial planning and forecasting; · ensuring the security of staff in overseas offices;

strengthening our management of support staff.

41. The Management Board agreed with successes highlighted by the Director reflecting the hard work of the staff across the Division and noted that this was a well-managed Division.

42. The Board questioned how the increased Divisional programme budget was to be managed given the fixed administration budget . The Director was confident that the Division could manage the additional resources but that key constraints such as staffing gaps, lags in Direct Budget Support tranche release, quality of financial forecasting and conflict should be kept in view. Flexibility on staff deployment was constrained given that 500 of the Division's 550 staff were posted overseas.

43. The Management Board welcomed the Division's efforts to prepare for the increased spend including the focus on managing activities on the off-track PSA-targets. However, they encouraged the Director to constantly look hard at the cost of delivery including whether we could move further towards working through others (the Vietnam model), continue to encourage less "gold-plating" and to increase still further the level of aid volume through programmatic approaches (SWAPs and DBS). The Board questioned whether the Division was too risk adverse. It was noted that given the quality of analysis and state capacity in the region there was a paradox that we were providing less programmatic support and Direct Budgetary Support in Asia compared with Africa.

44. The Board welcomed the range of activities proposed to address the off-track maternal mortality rate MDG. Next year's DDP review should provide clear analysis of the impact and progress of these activities and highlight any key lessons.

45. The Board noted that the DDP contained more indicators than they needed to see. It was accepted, however, that the range of indicators had proved a useful management tool for the Director and promoted ownership of the plan. The Director was encouraged to keep in view the trade-off between inclusivity on the one hand and the need for focus bearing in mind the transaction costs of complex reporting. Indicators for the coming year should cover issues where progress needed to be shown for 2005.

46. The Board recognised the progress made on risk but noted that it would be useful to make further progress on active risk management and to ensure that there was even greater consistency on risk assessment and management across the regional Divisions. DG programmes would take forward work in this area. Greater clarity was also needed on which risks DFID was and was not able to control. The Board questioned whether increased security risks should affect the timing of devolution to the Afghanistan and Pakistan offices. 47.

The following action points were agreed:

Director to continue to review costs of doing business to ensure delivery of increased programme;

with Director General Programmes, keep under review Division's risk appetite, particularly for more programmatic support;

develop proposals for more active risk management, sharing experience with other regional Divisions

in developing forward annual indicators ensure prioritisation and focus, including on issues where progress needs to be shown for 2005;

next year's annual review to include specific report on impact of range of initiatives on address maternal mortality target;

conduct a quick review with Director General Programmes of planned timing of devolution to Islamabad and Kabul

Africa Division

48. Graham Stegmann summarised the key messages from his delivery plan annual review as follows:

Africa was making progress; there was growth across the continent and reduced conflict. Countries with Poverty Reduction Strategies (PRSs) had made the most progress. However, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were unlikely to be met overall in the region, though some would be met by some countries;

analysis from the World Bank showed that good performers could effectively absorb significant additional resources. We should meet the Prime Minister's £1 billion commitment for Africa;

we should expect there to be shocks, though it was impossible to predict exactly where and when. These would be caused primarily by conflict, climate change and terms of trade. HIV and AIDS and conflict would be the major constraining factors to further growth.

49. Key risks for the Division over the next year included:

political governance - and the need to improve our understanding of the links between political economy issues and poverty reduction;

short term shocks undermining longer term progress - the need to learn how to manage these; and

the challenge of maintaining prioritisation in the face of existing stretch and growing demands.

50. The 3 main successes over the past year were summarised as follows:

a) progress had been made on the PRS/DBS agenda. This was now embedded in Africa, with demand for this from partner countries, though this was not matched by adequate donor arrangements to respond;

b) the contribution of Africa Division, with OGDs, to conflict reduction in the region, including Sudan and Great Lakes; and

c) being effective at responding to the unexpected, for example, the food crisis in Southern Africa and demands in Ivory Coast, Liberia and Somalia.

51. The key challenges for the year ahead would be:

a) further progress in two areas: embedding peace processes (DRC, Sudan) and scaling up support to large countries with large numbers of poor (Ethiopia, Nigeria);

b) embedding the PRS approach - promoting horizontal learning within DFID and internationally, including around development financing; and

c) delivering our 2005 targets, for which donor harmonisation would be essential.

52. The Management Board welcomed the strategic grip of the DDP Review. The Director's presentation was a timely reminder of how far we had travelled and of DFID's continuing leading role in-country, across Whitehall and internationally. Africa Division was working to deliver a massive agenda, whose profile was high with Ministers and No.10. The staff of the Division deserved credit for their work.

53. The Board noted its concern that improving state capacity was critical to sustaining progress towards the MDGs. Whilst it was accepted that State capability was a focus of discussions around PRS, the Board considered that there is more to be done to ensure a broader understanding of this issue within DFID, across Whitehall and internationally: we needed to make success a part of the narrative, telling the story about the model of effective state building and on harmonisation.

54. The Board agreed with concern that there was a lack of harmonisation in approaches to development in the region. An articulated view was needed from Africa itself - and it was critical that this voice was heard. The Board noted that whilst DFID had an agreed harmonisation action plan this was not embedded in a clear strategic vision of how to focus international harmonisation efforts to improve aid effectiveness. The Board agreed that we should continue to provide support to Africa peer learning approaches.

55. Africa Division would need to pay special attention to managing the growth of its programme and administration costs. Getting the right people with the right skills would be key. The Board recognised that it needed to provide strong support for prioritisation of a challenging agenda. Directors were encouraged to continue to explore creative ways of managing staff and improving efficiency on the ground (for example lead donorship arrangements and sharing staff with other donors). The Board noted that the Deputy Directors were making an important contribution to the management agenda.

56. The Board applauded the Plan's tight focus on key risks to PSA delivery. However they encouraged the Director to ensure progress was maintained on managing compliance with core procedures and other internal 'reputational' risks.

57. On the maternal mortality PSA target, currently off-track, the Board noted the Director's concern that whilst they knew progress would be achieved through strengthening health systems, there was a lack of evidence as to the most effective approach.

58. The following action points were agreed:

work to broaden international understanding of how to support state capacity within a PRS framework (Africa Division lead with PD and Information Division support);

develop a strategic plan for DFID's work on harmonisation covering country, regional and international approaches (Aid Effectiveness Team);

improve management building on work to date (Africa Division);

ensure internal compliance reputational risks actively managed (Africa Division);

support to Africa (and Asia) in approaches to strengthening health systems to address maternal mortality (Policy Division).

Europe, Middle East and Americas Division

59. Carolyn Miller outlined the three main successes for EMAD over the past year as being:

a) completion of major regional planning exercises which provided a greater focus on graduation in line with the DDP. These plans formed a key plank in taking the DDP forward. EMAD would produce a synthesis of the RAP approach for the Development Committee;

b) strengthening work across Whitehall and linking this to strengthened work in the international arena including work with the Development Banks (EBRD, IADB and CDB) and the EC;

c) improved donor coordination.

60. The Division had experienced a challenging year where staffing shortfalls had been difficult, as had lack of flexibility on financial resources. The Iraq war and engagement in the follow-up to this had placed an initially very heavy burden on the Division. The cut in Middle Income Country funding had been tackled commendably well by staff. The open, frank exchange had been useful and valued. Over the coming year the main challenges for the Division would be:

a) the need to move to greater focus on implementing the DDP;

b) the need to work more closely with other parts of DFID building upon work already going on in this area e.g. the work on Middle Income Countries needed to gain wider DFID ownership;

c) more effective communication including greater focus on how the division measures what it is doing including in influencing other donors.

61. Top Management Support was vital in emphasising the importance of the work of the Division, which covered both MICs and LICs.

62. The Board welcomed the presentation and the clear sense of priorities this set out. This was a particular challenge for EMAD given the diversity of regions and issues covered. The Board appreciated that the last year had been a very difficult one and expressed their gratitude for the positive response of EMAD staff who were encouraged to continue to come forward with concerns they may have. The increased regional focus of the Division was valuable and of wider interest - Development Committee discussions would be useful.

63. EMAD had a wide range of potential partners. The Board encouraged the Director to continue to focus down on the most critical relationships to support delivery, particularly in seeking senior management engagement and support and deployment of limited EMAD resources. Withdrawal from partnerships that have delivered limited impact should be considered and the Board looked forward to a report on this in next year's DDP review. The DFID vision for the international system's engagement in the MICs should be included as part of the upcoming discussions between the Secretary of State and Wolfensohn at the Spring meetings (the Bank's approach to MICs could present both opportunities and threats). Nicola and Brenda Killen's forthcoming visit to Washington should lay the groundwork for this discussion.

64. Whilst recognising the diversity of the region the Board encouraged the Director to prioritise which risks she needed to actively manage at the divisional level.

65. Much of the work of EMAD focused upon influencing the work of others. Ongoing work to measure the impact of influencing was a priority recognising the value of both qualitative and quantitative evidence. It was noted that the DAC is setting up a working group to look at this issue.

66. The following action points were agreed:

Director to review critical partnerships to support delivery with view to rationalisation;

Director General Programmes and Head of EMAP to explore potential for influencing World Bank's approach to MICs in forthcoming visit;

contribute to briefing for bilateral between SoS and Wolfensohn on international system's engagement with MICs;

prioritise risk assessment table and develop plans for active risk management;

Sarah Dunn and Alison Scott to keep EMAD informed of work of DAC on measuring the impact of influencing. Iraq

67. As Iraq does not have a DDP it was covered in discussions of the EMAD review.

68. Jim Drummond outlined the three main successes over the past year as being:

a) the humanitarian effort which has been well-managed;

b) the transition from conflict to a period of reconstruction;

c) the increased focus, post the Madrid conference, of DFID and HMG's approach, with DFID setting out a clear agenda articulated in the recently approved CAP.

69. The remaining challenges revolved around reconstruction, political transition and security. Specifically over the coming year the work would need to centre on the following key areas:

d) getting the international community re-engaged;

e) lesson learning from Iraq;

f) work to ensure that the Whitehall process and decision-making was not too short-term;

g) that staff at the appropriate levels were available for the Iraq programme and that the security of all staff remained a paramount issue;

h) that exit strategies were developed and plans for re-merging Iraq into EMAD were developed.

70. The Board welcomed the clear presentation of priorities. They congratulated the Director on the light process for preparing the Country Assistance Plan. The broad issues set out for the coming year seem to be the right ones. Suma, Nicola and Directors should have a discussion in April/May on the longer term institutional arrangements for management of the Middle-East programmes. The Board endorsed the proposal to administer aid from a development section within the Embassy to be set up in Baghdad recognising that the Director for Iraq was alive to the need to ensure that any aid administration arrangements put in place needed to be kept light to allow for future graduation. The Director noted a separate opportunity to set up a small office in Basra.

71. The following action points were agreed:

a) Permanent Secretary, Director General Programmes and Directors Iraq and EMAD to have early discussion of longer-term institutional arrangements for managing the Middle East programmes;

b) Directors Iraq and EMAD to ensure next annual review includes plan for reintegration of the Iraq programme.

Sarah Dunn and Paul Whittingham	Charlie Whetham
Performance and Effectiveness Department	Board Secretary

Board Papers and Agenda

Meeting on Wednesday 21 January 2004

Room: 3W10

Timing: 0900 till 1500

Apologies: none

Notes: observers will be able to drop into a dedicated room in their office to observe any of the V/Ced DDP discussions - in filming, we will be using two cameras, and, in displaying, the whole of the screen (i.e. not taking up any of the screen quadrants by showing other observers)

 

Time	Topic	Attending	Purpose	MB Obj.
0900	Board preparatory time,including, at 0945, a brief financial overview by FD
1000	Finance Director's Delivery Plan	Richard Calvert, Kevin Sparkhall Sue Wardell	To ensure appropriate policy direction and allocation of financial and staff resources	A, B C and D
1100	HR Director's Delivery Plan	Dave Fish, John Anning, Ian McKendry, Jane Clarke, Peter Brough (by V/C)	To ensure appropriate policy direction and allocation of financial and staff resources	A, B C and D
1200	Information Director's Delivery Plan	Owen Barder, Mike Green, David Gillett, Phillip Smith	To ensure appropriate policy direction and allocation of financial and staff resources	A, B C and D
1300	Lunch	MB
1330	Board preparatory time
1400	Policy Director's Delivery Plan	Sharon White, Susanna Moorehead, Richard Tilbrook	To ensure appropriate policy direction and allocation of financial and staff resources	A, B C and D
1930	Dinner with Secretary of State	MB	To discuss SoS's priorities for the forthcoming year	A and D

Meeting on Thursday 22 January 2004

Room: 3W10

Timing: 0900 till 1600

Apologies: none

Notes: observers will be able to drop into a dedicated room in their office to observe any of the V/Ced DDP discussions - in filming, we will be using two cameras, and, in displaying, the whole of the screen (i.e. not taking up any of the screen quadrants by showing other observers)

 

Time	Topic	Attending	Purpose	MB Obj.
0900	Board preparatory time
1000	Asia Director's Delivery Plans	Martin Dinham, Pam Jenkins, Jeremy Clarke	To ensure appropriate policy direction and allocation of financial and staff resources	A, B C and D
1100	Africa Director's Delivery Plans	Graham Stegmann, David Batt, Graham Teskey, Richard Dewdney	To ensure appropriate policy direction and allocation of financial and staff resources	A, B C and D
1200	Lunch	MB
1230	Board preparatory time
1300	EMAD Director's Delivery Plans	Carolyn Miller, Jim Drummond, Roger Clarke, Brenda Killen	To ensure appropriate policy direction and allocation of financial and staff resources	A, B C and D
1400	International Director's Delivery Plan	Peter Grant, Rachel Turner, Mary Hunt, Dianna Melrose	To ensure appropriate policy direction and allocation of financial and staff resources	A, B C and D
1500	Resource Allocation Round-up	Finance Department	In the light of the DDP Reviews, to discuss the final draft Aid Framework prior to submission to Ministers	B and C