Value for Money Framework

The Value for Money (VfM) Framework establishes a consistent, evaluative approach for FSD programmes to determine if resources are used effectively to reduce poverty. It moves beyond simple indicators by using 'rubrics'—predefined criteria and performance standards—to make reasoned judgements. The framework is built on the 'Four Es' (Economy, Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Equity) plus Cost-effectiveness, and is aligned with Impact-Oriented Measurement (IOM) and the FSD Compendium of Indicators. It emphasizes a mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative data with qualitative narratives to account for the complexity of market system changes.

• The framework defines Value for Money (VfM) as an evaluative question regarding the justification and quality of resource use, rather than a simple set of indicators.
• To ensure transparent and robust judgements, the framework employs 'rubrics' consisting of specific criteria (dimensions of performance) and standards (levels of performance ranging from 'excellent' to 'poor').
• The framework is structured around five core criteria: Economy (cost and value of inputs), Efficiency (conversion of inputs to outputs), Effectiveness (achievement of outcomes), Cost-effectiveness (relationship between impact and total costs), and Equity (targeting of marginalised groups).
• VfM assessments are designed to be aligned with the Impact-Oriented Measurement (IOM) framework and the FSD Compendium of Indicators to ensure consistency in terminology and measurement of market system changes.
• The framework advocates for a mixed-methods evidence base, combining quantitative indicators with qualitative narratives to provide a more nuanced understanding of performance than indicators alone could offer.
• Because FSDs operate in complex environments, the framework accounts for 'emergent strategy'—new approaches adopted in response to an evolving context—rather than judging performance solely against the original intended strategy.
• The framework recommends a contribution analysis approach to establish plausible attribution of outcomes to FSD interventions, acknowledging that direct attribution is often difficult in macro-level market interventions.
• The framework suggests a tiered timing for assessments: short-term outcomes may be assessed annually, while longer-term impacts are more realistically assessed every 2-3 years.

APA

FSD Africa (n.d.). Value for Money Framework. https://fsdafrica.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Value-for-Money-Framework.pdf

Chicago

FSD Africa. Value for Money Framework. n.d. https://fsdafrica.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Value-for-Money-Framework.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=FSD Africa |title=Value for Money Framework |url=https://fsdafrica.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Value-for-Money-Framework.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{fsdafricandvalue, author = {{FSD Africa}}, title = {{Value for Money Framework}}, institution = {FSD Africa}, url = {https://fsdafrica.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Value-for-Money-Framework.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }