APEC Project Quality Assessment Criteria
Uploaded by
RodrigoOliveiraSilvaAPEC Project Quality Assessment Criteria
Uploaded by
RodrigoOliveiraSilvaAppendix F
Quality Criteria for Assessing APEC Projects
APEC assesses project quality using the following five criteria:
Relevance
Effectiveness
Efficiency
Impact; and
Sustainability
Quality criteria are judged as either satisfactory, or unsatisfactory.
APEC members assess Relevance through the prioritization stage of the project cycle. Concept
Notes that are asked to complete full proposals are considered to reach satisfactory relevance. The
Secretariat assesses the remaining four criteria at the full proposal stage.
Proposals must reach a minimum score of 2 under each criterion to be considered for funding
approval.
Further information about each of the criterion is as follows:
Relevance: This looks at WHY a project is proposed. Relevance considers the extent to which
projects are needed and suited to achieving the priorities and objectives of the target group, the
recipient member economies and APEC as a whole. APEC Committee work plans and sub-fora
Working Group plans are an important reference point for what is relevant to a groups priorities.
How valid are the objectives of the project?
Are the activities and outputs of the project consistent with the overall project goals?
Are the activities and outputs of the project consistent with the intended impact?
Effectiveness: This examines HOW a project will take place, particularly how well a project
might reach its objectives.
To what extent are the objectives likely to be achieved are they realistic?
What is the APEC value-add? Why is this a good project for APEC?
Based on the particular issue being addressed, is the proposed approach a sound way to
achieve the objectives, and have other alternative approaches been examined?
Does the project take into account and or build on previous APEC activities with similar
objectives?
Efficiency: This also looks at HOW a project will take place, particularly measuring of the
outputs (services, goods) in relation to the inputs (cost of resources). Efficiency considers if the
project offers value for money and whether projects use the least costly resources allowed in order
to achieve the desired results.
Do the activities appear to be cost-efficient?
Do the activities comply with APEC project budget guidelines?
Would alternative approaches deliver the same result for less cost?
Appendix F
Impact: This asks WHAT the project seeks to change. It includes possible impacts on key
stakeholders and effectiveness in addressing APEC values such as gender equity. Impact will
consider project risks and risk management, including the possible impact of external factors,
such as changes in terms of trade or financial conditions.
What are the likely changes following from this project?
What difference will the activity make to the target beneficiaries?
Beyond the target group, who else is likely to benefit? Are there multiplier effects that can be
gained from this project?
What support exists for the project across APEC, taking into account the potential for multiple
fora support to reinforce the benefits across a range of sectors and areas of work?
What avenues will be used to communicate and promote the project results, not only to
member economies but also stakeholders and desired partners?
Sustainability: This looks at whether the benefits of a project are likely to continue after the
APEC project is completed. It has a longer term focus compared to other criterion.
What are the intended effects over the longer term?
Does the project provide for methods to ensure benefits of a project will continue after the
APEC project ceases?
Is there evidence of engagement with key stakeholders?
How does this project fit in with foras priorities and are follow-on projects planned?
