Programme management
While instruments to implement straightforward projects are common, we tend to be less well equipped when implementing programs, particularly when the programs involve a combination of institutional measures, changes in behaviour, multiple financing mechanisms and a relatively large distance between financer and implementer. We tend to invest considerably in justifying the use of resources and inputs - but do far less at the level of outputs and achievement of program goals. Programs by nature are more complex: more players, more interests, more uncertainties, and a longer time-lag to measure impact or the lack of it. The risk is that this complexity translates into drift, lack of attention to effectiveness of cost efficiency, internal confusion and no external ownership.

MetaMeta has developed a compendium of instruments to improve the implemention of policies, programs and complex projects, revolving around what we call Meta-Frame. Meta-Frame asks seven questions into the mechanisms of program implemention. It is called a Meta-Frame because it concentrates at the meta level where objectives have to be achieved amidst complexity and resources and external opportunities have to be managed preferably in an entrepreneurial manner. Meta-Frame has also been called a program governance audit .

Recently MetaMeta Management undertook a review of the policy of DGIS in mainstreaming environment and water, a study for DANIDA into donor harmonization, a policy evaluation of the sector approach in environment.  We are also supporting a number of complex programmes and projects, such as the Horn of Africa Regional Environmental Program, and have undertaken several evaluations and program formulations.