DFID’s approach to delivering impact

This report reviews ICAI’s previous 44 reports and looks at how well DFID ensures positive, long-term, transformative change across its work.

  1. Status: Completed
  2. Published: 11 June 2015
  3. Type: Other
  4. Subject: Cross-cutting
  5. Assessment: Unrated
  6. Lead commissioner: Diana Good

Read the inception report

Read the terms of reference

Our approach

In this report, we reviewed how well the Department for International Development (DFID) maximises development impact. We drew together findings from across our reviews and additional research at headquarters and country levels. Our concern in this report was not whether DFID achieves impact but how well it goes about ensuring meaningful and sustainable impact across its portfolio. By ‘impact’, we mean positive, long-term, transformative change for poor people, who are the intended beneficiaries of UK aid.

This report marks a point in ICAI’s work at which we are interested in reflecting on and seeking to understand what works well and why, as well as what could work better and why. This review focusses on how effectively DFID’s current systems, processes and tools deliver impact for intended beneficiaries. It does not aim to assess the overall impact of DFID’s aid programme. Development impact is a large and complex topic. The review builds on the findings of earlier ICAI reviews and we identify areas for future ICAI work.

Review questions

  1. Objectives: How does DFID define impact and how does this relate to the needs of intended beneficiaries?
  2. Delivery: What are the key components of aid delivery (including partners, process and tools) that help DFID achieve impact for intended beneficiaries? Are they fit for purpose and used effectively?
  3. Impact: How does DFID’s approach help it to maximise actual impact and sustainability for intended beneficiaries?
  4. Learning: How has DFID’s experience of implementing its practices and tools helped to improve its focus on impact?

Timeline

Approach

Published 11 March 2014

Evidence gathering

Complete

Review publication

Published 11 June 2015