WWF UK – Value for Money BOND May 2012

1. WWF UK – Value for Money BONDMay 2012 WWF UK – WWF Nepal

2. Purpose of V4M in WWF • Understand what value for money means for us and our stakeholders • Demonstrate or explore evidence that supports it • Improve our value for money approaches • Set a Time frame for the value for money learning journey. WWF UK – WWF NEPAL

3. Approaches • Management: management processes, resource analysis and decisions – BOND paper, DFID questionnaire • Values: stakeholder perceptions of the benefits or values of their environment – This is an area less well explored and one we can offer as it is essential to the effectiveness of our work with stakeholders and beneficiaries. • Measures:4 Es (economy, efficiency, effectiveness & equity) – most talk of the 3 Es, but equity is an essential dimension of conservation work and its development dimensions. WWF UK – WWF NEPAL

4. 4 Es Framework of value for Money WWF UK – WWF NEPAL

5. WWF UK – WWF NEPAL

6. Key Results • Only 3 programmes are considering value for money in all categories of the 4Es; Coastal East Africa, Colombia and East Africa freshwater Naivasha. • All of the programmes have concentrated their efforts on improving Effectiveness of their programmes, although only 3 programmes have enough of results to apply value for money measures to them; e.g. Colombia, Coastal East Africa and China Africa. • Importantly for PPA, although only three programmes are currently report considering aspects of Equity, 7 programmes are planning to consider them to some degree – progress on this will be monitored as we move forward. • The Economy category of value for money was the least well explored, and although 7 programmes mentioned aspects of staff costs verses activity costs, very few of them explained how costs were kept down, or where economies are being made, the exception to this was East Africa freshwater Ruha programme which talked of obtaining pro-bono days from their consultants. • In terms of Efficiency, the most common aspect considered here was leverage, either in terms of using PPA funds to obtain or access other funding or to obtain local counterpart support. • Colombia programme for example has levered project funds from 8 sources, amounting to £1,124,119 for FY12. • Nepal programme has levered $26 million from USAID for a five year project with five partners - Approximately $5-$6 Million is for Nepal, equivalent to approximately £3.5 million for 5 years or £700K per year, which gives it a total leverage . WWF UK – WWF NEPAL

7. WWF UK – WWF NEPAL

8. Examples • Management: WWF-UK – procurement improvements DFID questionnaire • Values: International Climate Policy and Climate Adaptation Learning – Stakeholder Counterfactual, Value of our work • Measures: Colombia – Bang for buck; Cost efficiency & leverage • Measures & Values: China Africa – SROI/CBA and impact value WWF UK – WWF NEPAL

9. Voices not often heard, but whose context we need to understand WWF UK – WWF Nepal