top of page

It is time to take action!

Join our Tribe of Changemakers.

Sign up for Virtual Conversations! 


This indicator measures the extent to which, and the ways in which, all concerned development partners use country-owned results frameworks (CRFs) to plan development cooperation efforts and assess their
performance. The indicator assesses the degree to which providers of development cooperation (i.e. development partners) design their interventions by relying on objectives and results indicators that are drawn from country government-owned results frameworks reflecting the country’s development priorities and goals.


Country-owned results frameworks (CRFs) define a country’s approach to results and its associated
monitoring and evaluation systems focusing on performance and achievement of development results. Using a minimal definition, these results frameworks include agreed objectives and results indicators (i.e. output, outcome, and/or impact). They also set targets to measure progress in achieving the objectives defined in the government’s planning documents. The definition of country-owned results framework used for this indicator allows the possibility to use equivalent priority-setting mechanisms at the country level since not all countries articulate their priorities through consistent, integrated CRFs.

In practice, country-owned results frameworks defined at the country level are often broadly stated (e.g. long-term vision plans, national development strategies) and operationalized in more detail at the sector level (e.g. sector strategies), where specific targets and indicators are set for a given timeframe. Some examples of CRFs are long-term vision plans; national development strategies; joint government-multi-donor plans; government’s sector strategies, policies and plans; subnational planning instruments, as well as other frameworks (e.g. budget support performance matrices & sector-wide approaches). In contrast, planning and priority setting documents produced outside the government, such as country strategies prepared by development partners, are not considered CRFs.

The Inter-agency Expert Group on Sustainable Development Goal Indicators (IAEG-SDG) selected Extent of use of country-owned results frameworks and planning tools by providers of development cooperation as the appropriate indicator to benchmark progress. To provide a comprehensive measure on the extent of use of country-owned results frameworks and other government planning tools, the indicator should calculate the degree to which objectives, results indicators and monitoring frameworks associated with new development interventions are drawn from government sources (United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Statistics Division, 2015).

In other words, this indicator should assess the degree of alignment between donor support and a developing country’s goals priorities. It should also measure the degree to which each country’s policy space and development policies are respected. In so doing, it should also attempt to record the policy design, system of results-reporting and assessment mechanisms or country-led results frameworks that each country has put in place. Analyses of this indicator must recognize that accountability needs to be balanced with the need to learn and exchange knowledge and experiences as different stakeholders may approach common developmental challenges in quite different ways.


The Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation (GPEDC) established at the Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Busan, in 2011, with the aim of fostering engagement and sharing knowledge to agree on and implement the principles of effective development cooperation (EDC). Arising from this, a monitoring framework, building on the experiences and lessons of international monitoring efforts since the 2005 Paris Declaration was proposed in 2012 in order to better respond to developing countries’ demand for a global accountability framework that could support their national implementation efforts.





The EDC monitoring framework comprises 10 indicators:

(1) development cooperation is focused on results that meet developing countries’ priorities;

 (2) civil society operates within an environment which maximizes its engagement in and contribution to development;

(3) engagement and contribution of the private sector to development;

(4) transparency: information on development cooperation is publicly available;

(5) development cooperation is more predictable;

(6) aid is on budgets which are subject to parliamentary scrutiny;

(7) mutual accountability among development cooperation actors is strengthened through inclusive reviews;

(8) gender equality and women’s empowerment;

(9) effective institutions: developing countries’ systems are strengthened and used;

(10) aid is untied. These indicators attempt to measure progress towards making development cooperation more effective in specific areas related to EDC principles: ownership, focus on results, inclusive development partnerships, transparency and mutual accountability among partners.

Indicator 1 of the GPEDC monitoring framework is measured by the Proportion of providers of development cooperation using country results frameworks. These frameworks define a country’s approach to monitoring and evaluating progress towards development. They include objectives, indicators, a baseline and targets to measure progress in implementing them and achieving outputs, outcomes and impacts, as stated in national development strategies, sector plans and other frameworks (for example, budget support performance matrices).


Such frameworks should ideally have been developed through participatory processes involving relevant national stakeholders (OECD and UNDP, 2014). The indicator aims to capture the relationship between the proportion of funding that is allocated to support national priorities versus expenditure programmes, the way in which this funding is disbursed, and its links to the country’s results framework. To account for some of these important aspects, the indicator has been designed to draw on a combination of quantitative and qualitative information.

For developing countries, classification is based on SDG grouping provided by the UN Statistical Office (regional classification, Least Developed Countries (LDCs), Landlocked Developing Countries (LLDCs), Small Island Developing States (SIDS)).

For development partners, classification is based on SDG grouping. In addition, bilateral partners can be distinguished between members of the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) and non-members. The monitoring is a voluntary and country-led process.


Country governments lead and coordinate data collection and validation. At country level, data are reported by relevant government entities (e.g. the Ministry of Finance/budget department for national budget information) and by development partners and stakeholders. OECD and UNDP support countries in collecting relevant data through the Global Partnership monitoring exercise, and these organizations lead data aggregation and quality assurance at the global level.


Last updated: 2022-03-31

(i) For the data collection process of the Global Partnership's monitoring exercise, a national coordinator is assigned by the country government. S/he typically comes from the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Planning, or the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, a Ministry that has a role for managing development cooperation and partnerships in accordance with the respective institutional structure of each country.

(ii) The national coordinator collects inputs from development partners. The data is submitted to the OECD and UNDP and subsequently undergoes a review round with the headquarters offices of development partners.

(iii) No adjustments are made to the data after they have undergone the validation process. However, inconsistencies or possible problematic values are highlighted and sent back to national coordinators for revision.


Representatives from the leading ministry in country governments are responsible for leading the national data gathering process and country-level validation. These representatives coordinate the data collection process at the national level by consolidating data and inputs from providers of development co-operation, civil society organizations, the private sector, and trade unions. For calculation of indicator 17.15.1, country governments submit the data to the OECD/UNDP Joint Support Team of the Global Partnership.


Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) jointly compile and report the data at the global level.


As custodians of this SDG indicator, OECD and UNDP are responsible for providing technical guidance and supporting countries to collect data, compiling and verifying country data, and for submitting the country data and aggregate data for this indicator. Drawing on their institutional support provided to the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation, OECD and UNDP leverage country participation in the Global Partnership monitoring exercise, which since 2013 has tracked progress towards the effectiveness principles and is the recognized source of data and evidence on upholding effectiveness commitments, to aggregate global data for this indicator. Countries not participating in the Global Partnership monitoring exercise are able to submit their country data directly to OECD and UNDP.

Data for countries have been compiled in 2016 and 2018. From 2023, data will be available on a rolling basis with all countries encouraged to report at least once within a four-year cycle.

Given the bottom-up approach in generating the indicator, disaggregation is possible at the country level and at the development partner level.
While data collection is led at the country level, in a bottom-up approach, global and regional aggregates can be used for monitoring internationally-agreed commitments related to strengthening country ownership and better partner alignment with nationally-set development goals.

bottom of page