UNDP Philippines 2019-2023 Country Programme Mid-term Review

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2019-2023, Philippines
Evaluation Type:
Country Programme Evaluation
Planned End Date:
03/2022
Completion Date:
06/2022
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
No
Evaluation Budget(US $):
50,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document TOR-CPD_MTR_UNDP Philippines.pdf tor English 273.29 KB Posted 115
Download document CPD Mid Term Review - PHL.pdf report English 9939.83 KB Posted 4
Title UNDP Philippines 2019-2023 Country Programme Mid-term Review
Atlas Project Number:
Evaluation Plan: 2019-2023, Philippines
Evaluation Type: Country Programme Evaluation
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 06/2022
Planned End Date: 03/2022
Management Response: No
Focus Area:
  • 1. Others
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
  • 1. Output 1.1.1 Capacities developed across the whole of government to integrate the 2030 Agenda, the Paris Agreement and other international agreements in development plans and budgets, and to analyse progress towards the SDGs, using innovative and data-driven solutions
Evaluation Budget(US $): 50,000
Source of Funding:
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 60,000
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Nationality
XXX XXX
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders: National Economic and Development Authority
Countries: PHILIPPINES
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1

[Linked to findings 1-4 on relevance] – To secure development gains, UNDP Philippines should continue its focus on capacity building of partner institutions as its core country programme strategy but revisit the CPD results chain and the overall approach of the CO in communicating its business case for 2021/2022 on how it intends to contribute to PDP, PFSD and SEPF objectives

2

[Linked to findings 5-6 on effectiveness] UNDP Philippines should continue its efforts to support GPH in the COVID-19 response and recovery in the immediate future; but it should harness its institutional repute to push for a renewed focus on the SDGs to frame the recovery.

3

[Linked to findings 7-9 on effectiveness, findings 14-16 on sustainability and overall finding 22] – In close consultation with national partners, UNDP Philippines should continue to improve its M&E processes and systems, including, develop mechanisms for monitoring CPD outcomes and outputs systematically, as well as ensure its project and Country Programme risk analyses are purposeful.

4

[Linked to findings 10 on efficiency and 8 on effectiveness] –UNDP Philippines should review its staffing structure and revisit its internal processes, particularly the speed of its procurement.

5

[Linked to findings 11, 12, 13 on efficiency and findings 21 and 23 on crosscutting issues] UNDP Philippines should communicate the Country Programme portfolio and results better to current (and likely) partners to improve mobilization and leveraging of resources.    

6

 [Linked to findings 17 and 18 on crosscutting issues] UNDP Philippines should design programs so that targeting of beneficiaries/program activities participation considers GESI and more youth involvement, as well as monitor extent of program participation of those with multiple poverty deprivations

7

[Linked to findings 19, 20 and 23 on crosscutting issues] UNDP Philippines should maintain its strong partnerships, especially with LGUs (and the BARMM government), and develop new partnerships particularly with private sector.   

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

1 UN Plaza
DC1-20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org