The search results of this Systematic Review demonstrated a lack of scientifically rigorous studies in this area. After applying four rounds of inclusion / exclusion criteria, 24 documents remained. Further studies are needed of the effectiveness of MDTFs as an aid modality. These must examine MDTFs as a whole, rather than simply tracking the progress of individual projects that the funds support. Another implication of the Review is that expectations for MDTF scope and effectiveness should be realistic and should consider the context and operating environment. In addition, future MDTFs should be based on clearly defined and agreed goals, and on realistic evaluations of donor, fund administrator, and recipient government will and capacities.
The review found that MDTFs are often designed and implemented without consideration of the political or security environment. Stakeholders at every level expect more of MDTFs than they can deliver.
Despite the fact that 37 studies stated that MDTFs had made positive steps towards enhancing ownership, on the whole, donors still require control of funds or earmark them for specific sectors. This reduces recipient government ownership of development priorities and funding.
There is a lack of rigorous evidence-based and independent research conducted on MDTFs. Because they are such a popular aid modality, further research into their general impact and, specifically, their impact on aid effectiveness is essential. Future evaluations need to incorporate outcome indictors that are relevant for the review of the MDTF as a separate and complete entity, rather than equating MDTF effectiveness with individual project success.
Studies in this review show that even global funds with uniform management structures and procedures that operate in multiple countries have varying experiences with effectiveness and impact. However, there are general guidelines that can inform future interventions, and a compilation of best and worst practices for MDTF design and implementation is needed.
Funds need to be designed around a strong programme theory that is clearly grounded in extensive knowledge of the context and the limitations of the operating environment. Fund design could be linked to Strategic Conflict Assessments, critical path analysis and political economy analysis.
An important conclusion of this review was that there was a lack of clarity surrounding the goals and operational structure of some MDTFs, resulting in the confusion of administering agency staff, donors, and recipient government stakeholders. Many of the recommendations contained in the studies stated that successful MDTF implementation and operation relies on first identifying clear goals and strategies at each level – donor, fund administrator and recipient government.
