DfID criticised by aid watchdog over way it pared back support for India and China

Aid watchdog hands international development department an amber/red rating for its exit and transition work, but DfID disputes the "rushed" report


By Civil Service World

16 Nov 2016

The Department for International Development has been admonished by the UK's official aid watchdog for the way it went about paring back its development support for countries including China, India and South Africa.

DfID has increasingly refocused its aid efforts in recent years to target a smaller group of low-income countries, following criticism that countries like India and China are increasingly able to support their own citizens as their economies grow.

In some cases that has meant fully withdrawing country-to-country support, while in others it has meant scaling back DfID's involvement, including moving from direct aid to providing technical assistance and advice on economic development.


Mark Lowcock interview: the Department for International Development perm sec on the new Aid Strategy
Department for International Development must not lose sight of poverty focus as more departments take on aid spending – MPs
DfID perm sec Mark Lowcock: poverty reduction won’t lose out as rest of Whitehall takes on aid spending


But a new report by the Independent Commission on Aid Impact paints a mixed picture of the department's exit and transition work, awarding the department an "Amber-Red" rating – which means it requires "significant improvement".

ICAI's report says that while DfID has overseen the "core business" of ending aid programmes "in an orderly and effective manner", it says there were "significant management weaknesses" in all seven cases it looked into.

In both India and China, the watchdog found that DfID had "cut short some programmes in order to meet deadlines", a move ICAI said had risked some partnerships and potentially put at risk the progress achieved by UK aid in previous decades.

"In most cases, DFID did not manage the exit process in such a way as to minimise the risk of development reversals and protect its past aid investments," the report says.

Although ICAI praises DfID for its phasing out of support to Vietnam, which its says had a "strong exit plan, based on broad consultations", the watchdog highlights cases where it believes "small, targeted investments" could have helped the department "to maximise the value of aid programmes that were being phased out" and "retain a stronger voice" in those countries.

The department's HR processes also come in for some criticism, with ICAI saying DfID gave "insufficient support" to its country teams to ensure that they had "the necessary skills in place to support the exit and transition processes".

"Although staff reductions were usually handled appropriately and national staff were supported into new positions where possible, central DfID human resource policies left UK-based staff at risk of redundancy once their office closed, causing some to leave prematurely," it adds.

ICAI says the department's exit and transition efforts were also "marked by serious communication errors", with the watchdog questioning the process by which countries were consulted about DfID's plans, and saying the department has not clearly communicated to the public the rationale for continuing development support in some countries.

It also says DfID has shown a "lack of learning" on some of the common problems affecting its transition programmes.

"Due to the limited central support or guidance and the absence of structured learning processes, we have given DfID a red rating for learning, our lowest rating," ICAI said.

"DFID’s failure to learn from past experience is a significant factor in its underperformance on exit and transition."

Francesca Del Mese, the ICAI commissioner who led the watchdog's review, said managing the transition to new forms of development partnership would be "increasingly important" for DfID, and would require "clear objectives, effective planning and strong communication".

She added: “Without a robust process, there is the risk of misunderstanding and miscommunication about what remains as part of the UK’s aid relationship, both in the countries themselves, and with the UK public.

“DFID must strengthen how it plans for change in its aid relationships with countries, and ensure it communicates to UK taxpayers clearly to avoid the risk of confusion.”

But a DfID spokesperson pushed back against the watchdog’s findings, saying: “DfID is a world leader in helping countries leave aid dependency behind and stand on their own two feet, building a safer, more prosperous world.

“We are disappointed that ICAI has rushed the publication of this inaccurate report that simply does not tell the whole story.

“As countries build upon their economic development Britain is determined to strengthen strategic partnerships that facilitate trade, boost business and combat poverty.

“DfID’s work supports these partnerships in a manner that provides value for money, always helps the world’s poorest and is open and transparent to the British public.”

Read the most recent articles written by Civil Service World - 'What keeps you awake at night?': A guide to the government risk management profession

Share this page