Value for Money Design, Assessment and Reporting: A practical guide

The document outlines a VfM framework for FSD programmes based on the 'Four Es' (economy, efficiency, effectiveness, and equity) plus cost-effectiveness. It moves beyond simple indicators to use a combination of quantitative data and qualitative narratives to make judged assessments of performance against predefined standards. The guide integrates with Impact-Oriented Measurement (IOM) and a Compendium of Indicators to help FSDs communicate their performance story and improve resource management.

• The VfM framework treats Value for Money as an evaluative question regarding the justification and quality of resource use, requiring qualitative judgements rather than relying solely on indicators.
• The assessment is structured around five core criteria: economy (input costs), efficiency (conversion of inputs to outputs), effectiveness (achievement of outcomes), cost-effectiveness (relationship between impact and total costs), and equity (distributive fairness for marginalised groups).
• To ensure transparency and consistency, the guide uses 'rubrics' that define specific performance levels—excellent, good, adequate, and poor—for each VfM criterion.
• The framework emphasizes a mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative indicators with 'outcome narratives' to provide a nuanced account of how interventions synergistically achieve results.
• Economy is assessed by comparing unit costs for significant inputs, such as consultants and flights, against agreed benchmarks and verifying the use of good procurement practices.
• Efficiency is measured by the delivery of outputs according to workplans and the ability of the FSD to produce the intended quality and quantity of deliverables within available resources.
• Effectiveness is judged by the FSD's contribution to positive market changes, categorized into partner changes, partner-influenced expansion/replication, and wider system changes.
• Cost-effectiveness in the FSD context is assessed using proxies based on high-level market change outcomes, specifically focusing on financial inclusion rather than direct poverty reduction measurements, which are often too long-term to attribute.
• Equity is evaluated across three levels: output equity (identifying target groups), outcome equity (reaching those groups through market changes), and impact equity (measurable gains in market access for target groups).
• The final VfM judgement should be a collective process involving FSD management, donors, and independent evaluators to reach a shared understanding of the 'centre of gravity' of performance.

APA

FSD Africa (n.d.). Value for Money Design, Assessment and Reporting: A practical guide. https://fsdafrica.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Value-for-Money-Guide.pdf

Chicago

FSD Africa. Value for Money Design, Assessment and Reporting: A practical guide. n.d. https://fsdafrica.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Value-for-Money-Guide.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=FSD Africa |title=Value for Money Design, Assessment and Reporting: A practical guide |url=https://fsdafrica.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Value-for-Money-Guide.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

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