Matching grant sources

Failure to evaluate WB (DEC):

http://econ.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTDEC/EXTRESEARCH/EXTPROGRAMS/EXTFINRES/0,,co
ntentMDK:23342666~pagePK:64168182~piPK:64168060~theSitePK:478060,00.html and
PDF

Author(s): Francisco Campos, Aidan Coville, Ana M. Fernandes, Markus Goldstein, David McKenzie
Summary: There is value in incomplete randomization experiments used to assess impact evaluation. Factors such
as political economy, eligibility criteria, and bureaucratic processes hinder the implementation of matching grants.
Lessons are drawn from these observations to improve implementation, and therefore meaningful impact
evaluation. The design of impact evaluation is reassessed; review should accommodate factors unique to each
project, rather than using generalized guidelines.

IFAD Ghana Rural finance (a bit distant):

http://www.ifad.org/evaluation/public_html/eksyst/doc/insight/pa/ghana.htm and
http://www.ifad.org/evaluation/public_html/eksyst/doc/insight/pa/ghana2012.pdf;
http://www.ifad.org/evaluation/public_html/eksyst/doc/prj/region/pa/ghana/rfsp.pdf
Author(s): Consolidated product of staff of the Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD
Summary: Rural Finance Support Project in Ghana illustrates successes and challenges matching grants pose. It is
important to note this project is limited in scope, as it covers a limited area. RFSP strengthened institutional
structures, but successes in accessibility to these structures remain to be seen. The criteria for the projects
evaluations are questioned; evaluating abstract factors on the micro level proved difficult and instead influence is
measured through concrete factors.

FAO Presentation:
http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/tci/pdf/Investment_Days_2011_2nd_day/Session_I/Asfaw__Matching_grants_in_rural_finance_and_agriculture_project_design_______.pdf
Author(s): Anna Afsaw
Summary: The efficiency of matching grants in rural finance and agriculture project design is evaluated through
several project reviews. The authors observations offer suggestions for reforming implementation of matching
grants: information concerning the framework of such grants is not consistent and suggests redesign,
implementation plans require structure, and that it is essential to conduct more meaningful research that yields
observable evidence.

Serbia Manual WB + EU:

http://www.innovationfund.rs/documents/matching_grants/MATCHING_GRANTS_Program_Grant_Man
ual_English.pdf
Author(s):
Summary: This manual is essentially a map that details the requirements needed by applicants to obtain
matching grants through the Innovation Fund. Applicants are defined as small to medium enterprises that exhibit
innovative potential in the field of technology. The purpose these applicants will fulfill through this fund is to

expand their influence through partnerships (both in the private sector and R&D organizations), private sector
investments, and commercialization.

WB MGF Comparison 2000: http://www.valuechains.org/dyn/bds/docs/311/BDStrainingDavidPhillips.pdf

Author(s): David. A Phillips
Summary: Assesses the need for support of small enterprises through micro-interventions; evaluation is
accomplished by the comparative evaluation of implementation methods. From these comparisons, the conclusion
is drawn that support must be flexible in meeting demands but also structured in how it meets those demands.
This can be met through reforms in the matching grants design: establishing economic need, local ownership, and
a foundation that will sustain growth.

Tunisia:
https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/10890/622400BRI0Ex0P0Box0361475B
00PUBLIC0.pdf?sequence=1
Author(s):
Summary: Economic need is established in pre-evaluation, specifically detailing which industry (exports) will yield
the most growth and sustained employment. There are statistically significant successes; effectiveness of matching
grant is measured by increased firm productivity and the resulting positive impact on employment. It is implied
that a structured scheme can not only improve effectiveness, but also reduce bias, increases data quality, and
provide access to better evaluation tools.

Latin America (EU journal need access code):

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09578810802060819
Author(s): Bronwyn H. Hall, Alessandro Maffioli
Summary: (I did not have full access to the article, but I will assess the abstract). Technology Development Funds
(TDF) in South American countries are evaluated. Four criteria to measure impact are assessed: R&D input
additionality, behavioral additionality, increases in innovative output, and improvements in performance. Though
evidence drawn from this evaluation shows improved R&D intensity and inclination towards innovative ideas,
statistical significance is lacking- due to the possibility that the assessment period lacked a realistic time frame.

USAID Philippines:
http://www.popcouncil.org/uploads/pdfs/frontiers/FR_FinalReports/Philippines_MGP.pdf
Author(s): Marilou Palabrica-Costello, Nimfa Ogena, Alejandro N. Herrin
Summary: Implications and of matching grant programs (MGP) in the Philippines are considered. Local
governments plan and implement specific interventions to successfully expand new resources for health and
innovative health technologies. The hands-on approach to the MGP helped facilitate these interventions. It is
implied that by mobilizing various resources, in addition to MGP funding, local governments can aid the
sustainability of the grant.

Evaluation of EU support to SME

http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/how/evaluation/evaluation_reports/reports/2013/1317_vol1_en.pdf
Author:
Summary: Support of private sector development (PSD) in third world countries is evaluated. PSD produced
successes such as regulatory reform, but positive results did not remain consistent. This is due to issues based in
overall implementation and country specific problems. A more specialized approach to prioritize different areas of
intervention for each country and specifically defined desired results and targets can produce more consistent
outcomes.

-----------------------------------------------------Balassa revealed CA: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9957.1977.tb00701.x/abstract

Designing and Implementing Agricultural Innovation Funds What is this about
Author:
Summary: The design and implementation of matching grants to fund innovation in agricultural development is
evaluated. Two assessments emerge as critical to the success of a grant. The first is that the scheme must be
specific in detailing the implementation process, or else it risks becoming subject to bureaucratic processes. The
other is that monitoring and evaluation (M & E) is essential to gathering meaningful information that conveys the
specific knowledge and innovation developing out of the use of innovation funds.