Evaluation of the BMZ Emergency COVID-19 Support Programme
The Emergency COVID-19 Support Programme (Corona-Sofortprogramm, CSP) was implemented by the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) between April 2020 and December 2021. It provided support to developing and emerging countries to curb the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. The evaluation was conducted in two phases and analyses the distribution channels and instruments used within the CSP.
The Emergency COVID-19 Support Programme (Corona-Sofortprogramm, CSP) was implemented by the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) between April 2020 and December 2021. It provided support to developing and emerging countries to curb the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. The evaluation was conducted in two phases and analyses the distribution channels and instruments used within the CSP.
The COVID-19 pandemic affected countries around the globe. In addition to the direct effects of the pandemic on people's health, the measures implemented to prevent further spread of the COVID-19 virus, led to dramatic socio-economic effects. Countries in the global south often lacked the means to mitigate these effects.
The BMZ set up the CSP with a budget of 4.8 billion euros. The programme financed measures to prevent, detect and mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic and its socio-economic consequences.
The CSP evaluation assesses the appropriateness and performance of the programme and thus contributes to accountability regarding the use of government funds. It evaluates the content and reach of the programme. A particular focus of the evaluation are the distribution channels and instruments used within the CSP. Based on evaluation results, conclusions and recommendations are derived, particularly regarding the suitability of distribution channels and instruments, for reactions to similar crises in the future.
Key Findings and Recommendations
Overall, the findings of the evaluation paint a positive picture of the CSP. The programme primarily supported projects in sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East and North Africa. It implemented these mainly through bilateral governmental and multilateral organisations. In particular, the high allocation of grants, the procurement of goods and equipment through multilateral and local organisations, and the development of response measures based on existing partnerships, were rated positively in the evaluation. In order to manage and align a response programme more systematically in a similar future crisis, as well as maintain success factors and make improvements to the CSP, the evaluation makes eight recommendations. Three key recommendations from the evaluation are presented below.
- In future crises, a stronger focus should be placed on the management of a crisis response programme.
-
The evaluation questions the appropriateness of the planning and coordination structures used in the CSP. These only existed at the outset, before being quickly dissolved again. This reduced the relevance of the CSP. For a future global crisis of comparable magnitude, the BMZ should therefore appoint a body that is responsible for institutionally anchoring a crisis response programme. This body should also assimilate findings from internal and external learning and review processes.
- Furthermore, the BMZ and the implementing organisations should examine the extent to which the allocation of funds to civil society organisations can be increased in a similar crisis situation.
-
The grass-roots links and knowledge of local needs which civil society organisations possess mean that working with them increases relevance and efficiency. However, these actors received only a very small proportion of the funds (less than 2 per cent); hence it was not possible to fully exploit these advantages. In case obstacles to cooperation arise during crises, crisis mechanisms and procedures to enable higher direct awards should be developed or expanded in advance.
- Future crisis programmes should also be aligned more closely with the vulnerability, affectedness and needs of the partner countries.
-
No systematic analyses of the vulnerability, affectedness and needs of the countries and target groups were carried out when the programme was launched, or more especially as the pandemic and the programme continued to unfold, in order to comprehensively manage the distribution of funds. The programme relied heavily on existing partnerships, which enabled a rapid crisis response. However, the allocation of funds in the second year of the programme (2021), for example, could have taken greater account of these aspects. To ensure that this recommendation is implemented, the BMZ should immediately develop a procedure for comprehensively identifying partner country needs during a crisis.
The evaluation was conducted from 2021 to 2024. Key findings and recommendations are summarised here. Further findings and recommendations can be found in the evaluation report.
Background
The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic are widespread and directly or indirectly affected countries worldwide. At the beginning of this evaluation, in December 2021, the pandemic and its challenges at national and international level were still ongoing.
As a result of the pandemic, the global economy contracted by 3.5% in 2020 and had only partly recovered by 2021. It is estimated that extreme poverty rose again in 2020 for the first time in over 20 years and that around 71 million people were newly pushed into extreme poverty. Under these circumstances, it seems unlikely that the SDGs can be achieved.
To counteract these negative effects, governments around the world launched extensive response programmes. Whereas industrial countries invested an average of 8% of their GDP in 2020 to reduce the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, emerging and developing countries spent less than 4% and 2% respectively of their GDP in the same period.
In April 2020, the BMZ launched the CSP with a total volume of EUR 4.8 billion to finance measures to prevent, detect and mitigate the pandemic and its socio-economic consequences.
Objectives
- Phase 1: Contribute to accountability through a rapid assessment of the relevance and efficiency of the CSP with regard to distribution channels, instruments, recipients and content
- Phase 2: Perform a sound assessment of the effectiveness, efficiency, coherence and relevance of CSP's distribution channels and instruments; to learn for future crises
Methods
The objective of the DEval evaluation is to analyse the instruments and measures that were used by the Emergency COVID-19 Support Programme between April 2020 and December 2021.
The DEval evaluation was split into two phases. The first phase comprises a portfolio analysis that assesses the relevance and efficiency of the programme. This portfolio analysis is based on the assessment of monitoring data, and on findings from a systematic literature analysis regarding distribution channels, instruments and topics.
In the second phase, additional analyses were conducted regarding the programme’s relevance and efficiency as well as its effectiveness and coherence. The evaluation includes a broad data collection including a standardised virtual survey among all partner countries reached through the CSP, as well as qualitative and quantitative surveys in selected case study countries (Burkina Faso, Jordan and Lebanon), and a document study.
Contact
Dr Cornelia Römling
Phone: +49 (0)228 336907-996
E-mail: cornelia.roemling@DEval.org
Amélie Gräfin zu Eulenburg
Phone: +49 (0)228 336907-930
E-mail: amelie.eulenburg@DEval.org
Related Documents
Publications
- Evaluation of the BMZ Emergency COVID-19 Support Programme. Lessons from the Pandemic
- Die Evaluierung des Corona-Sofortprogramms des BMZ. Lernen aus der COVID-19-Pandemie
- Policy Brief: Relevance and Efficiency of the Emergency COVID-19 Support Programme: BMZ prioritised rapid disbursement to partner countries
- Policy Brief: Relevanz und Effizienz des Coronasofortprogramms: BMZ setzte auf schnelle Auszahlung an Partnerländer