

Annex 6 Qualitative Appraisal of JointStaff Assessments

Published Date:
September 2004
  • ShareShare
Show Summary Details

The IEO undertook a desk review of the 28 JSAs sents the criteria used in assigning quality ratings to of full PRSPs issued through May 2003, involving a selected aspects of JSAs, as well as the average and systematic analysis of their contents in areas of in-median ratings obtained by JSAs in our sample for terest to the evaluation team. The table below pre-each of these aspects.

JSA Assessment Matrix: Coding SchemeMeanMedian
1: Highly unsatisfactory 2: Unsatisfactory 3: Satisfactory 4: Highly satisfactory
Analysis of Risks to Successful PRSP Implementation3.183
1. Risks to PRSP implementation not discussed
2. Discussion of risks is limited
3. Risks adequately discussed but no remedial actions suggested
4. Risks exhaustively discussed along with remedial actions
Clear and Candid Assessment of the Following Key Areas:
A. Ownership and Participation2.432
1. Little or no description of participatory process and no discussion of ownership at all
2. Incomplete discussion of country ownership and participation
3. Good description of participatory process and discussion of ownership
4. Extensive description of country ownership and participation and its impact on the content of the strategy
B. Targets, Indicators, and Monitoring3.363.5
Criteria: (i) Realism, (ii) Consistency with priorities, (iii)Transparency/Participatory methods for monitoring the PRSP, and (iv) Feedback into policy decisions
1. Partial description without assessment
2. Good description but no assessment
3. Good description and some assessment (1 or 2 criteria met)
4. Full description and good assessment (3 or 4 criteria met)
C. Priority Public Actions
C1. Macroeconomic Framework3.043
Criteria: (i) Soundness, (ii) Realism, (iii) Trade-offs, and (iv) Robustness
1. No assessment at all
2. Assessment of soundness only
3. Assessment of soundness and some qualitative assessment
4. Assessment covers soundness, realism, robustness, and discussion of trade-offs
C2. Fiscal Choices3.143
Criteria: (i) Internal consistency, (ii) Quality of data and cost estimates, and (iii) Administrative capacity to deliver
1. No discussion at all
2. Assessment covers only one criterion
3. Assessment covers two criteria
4. Assessment covers all three criteria
C3. Financing Plan2.793
Criteria: (i) Realism, (ii) Sustainability, (iii) Alignment, and (iv) Contingency plans
1. No discussion at all
2. Assessment covers only one criteria
3. Assessment covers two criteria
4. Assessment covers three or four criteria
Due Consideration of Country Situation2.813
1. No discussion of initial conditions
2. Limited discussion of domestic context with respect to the PRSP
3. Discussion of the country situation is adequate, but weakly linked to PRSP
4. Country situation is well discussed as well as its links to the PRSP

    Other Resources Citing This Publication