This study sets up a process for the systematic evaluation of the effectiveness of aid agencies in aid delivery through evaluating the projects and programmes that they are implementing. It evaluates and compares five different aid agencies comprising of a bilateral aid donor, non-government organisation, community based organisation, development bank and multilateral aid donor. The common ground for comparison is that these agencies have all been providing assistance to, or working in, the forestry sector in the Solomon Islands over a relatively long period. The study found that it is possible to apply a systematic comparative evaluation process to aid agencies, and the projects and programmes that they were implementing, despite seemingly large differences in aid philosophy and aid management among them. By applying systematic comparative evaluations such as the one set up in this study it is possible to learn from all agencies how to enhance the effectiveness of aid delivery for the ultimate benefit of donor and recipient alike. The study found that none of the agencies reviewed in the study were necessarily more effective than any other agency in aid delivery. There was likewise no evidence that any one theoretical position on development, or any particular approach to aid delivery was necessarily any more effective when it came to implementing aid projects or programmes. There are too many variables affecting the implementation of projects and programmes for any one approach to aid delivery or theoretical position to be the most effective in all cases.