| To enlarge international prestige, Korea has to increase the amount of assistance to developing countries. KOICA who has distributed international grants from 1991 has implemented the mid-term CAS from 2007 to improve grant programs. In addition, it has appraised the CAS evaluation from 2008 to review the validity of the CAS implementation. This study is to analyze the current evaluation criteria and to find what the CAS evaluation criteria consist of.
By using Factor Analysis and Hierarchical Cluster Analysis, this study analyzes how the evaluation criteria of the two institutions are classified and what the relationship of the evaluation criteria are composed of. As a result of the Independent T-Test analysis, the difference between KOICA and ADB evaluation criteria has found that ADB considers the criteria of "Impact" and "Managing for Results" better than KOICA.
This study suggests that international evaluation criteria have to be applied not unilaterally but multi-laterally, that the concept of evaluation criteria has to clear, and that the evaluation criteria are suggested according to what objects need to be assessed. Also it suggests that the CAS evaluation manual needs to include the necessary items for evaluation to enable a more systematic and reliable evaluation.