By some, the IF is regarded as a failed program because the responsiveness of the involved parties (LDCs, development agencies, and donors) was much smaller than had been expected.[7] Susan Prowse from the UK's Overseas Development Institute, for example, points out that LDCs and donors had different perceptions and expectations about the purpose of the IF: While LDCs expected it to be mainly a vehicle to mobilize more financial resources for development interventions, donors sought to create a mechanism to improve co-ordination. Prowse, as others, also mentions that the main flaw of the IF lay in its design, meaning, that the assistance that was channeled through the IF was not aligned to a country's overall development strategy.[8]