Independent Country Programme Evaluation: Indonesia

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2018-2021, Independent Evaluation Office
Evaluation Type:
ICPE/ADR
Planned End Date:
12/2019
Completion Date:
12/2019
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
No
Evaluation Budget(US $):
50,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document ICPE Indonesia ToR.pdf tor English 286.53 KB Posted 9
Download document ICPE Indonesia Annex.pdf related-document English 854.08 KB Posted 14
Download document ICPE Indonesia EvalBrief.pdf summary English 209.89 KB Posted 17
Download document ICPE Indonesia full report.pdf report English 5246.87 KB Posted 29
Title Independent Country Programme Evaluation: Indonesia
Atlas Project Number:
Evaluation Plan: 2018-2021, Independent Evaluation Office
Evaluation Type: ICPE/ADR
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 12/2019
Planned End Date: 12/2019
Management Response: No
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
  • 2. Output 1.2.1 Capacities at national and sub-national levels strengthened to promote inclusive local economic development and deliver basic services including HIV and related services
  • 3. Output 2.1.1 Low emission and climate resilient objectives addressed in national, sub-national and sectoral development plans and policies to promote economic diversification and green growth
  • 4. Output 2.3.1 Data and risk-informed development policies, plans, systems and financing incorporate integrated and gender-responsive solutions to reduce disaster risks, enable climate change adaptation and mitigation, and prevent risk of conflict
  • 5. Output 3.1.1 Core government functions and inclusive basic services4 restored post-crisis for stabilisation, durable solutions to displacement and return to sustainable development pathways within the framework of national policies and priorities
  • 6. Output 3.2.2 National and local systems enabled and communities empowered to ensure the restoration of justice institutions, redress mechanisms and community security
Evaluation Budget(US $): 50,000
Source of Funding:
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 50,000
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Alan Fox Chief of Section
Landry Fanou Research and Evaluation Consultant
David Slattery Evaluation Advisor
Chasan Ascholani Evaluation Consultant
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders:
Countries: INDONESIA
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1

For the next cycle, UNDP should revise and consolidate its country programme in Indonesia, promoting a narrower set of outcomes and outputs that show promise for achieving scale and impact.

To maximize the potential impacts of programme interventions, especially, but not exclusively in the case of pilots or geographically delimited interventions, UNDP should endeavour to increase the scale of proven interventions and avoid engaging in small pilots of untested interventions that have limited prospects of influencing Indonesian Government policies or programmes.

UNDP should attempt to build on its role as a convener among development partners in Indonesia, strengthening the work it is currently doing in Papua and West Papua, and on countering violent extremism. There is also good potential for UNDP to expand its support to Indonesia’s foreign aid aspirations, including as a facilitator of South-South cooperation. Given the limited prospects for scaling up existing interventions relating to sustainable palm oil production, UNDP should consider getting out of this business.
 

2

The sustainable development portfolio, including disaster risk reduction, anchors the UNDP country programme in Indonesia, yet UNDP manages just a small fraction of environment and climate change financial inflows into the country. There is significant potential for growth in this area and UNDP should develop a strategy to expand its expertise and services.

In particular, UNDP should seek to capitalize on its strong position as a provider of environmental financial services, building on its successful advisory role in the issuance of Indonesia’s first-ever sovereign green bond.

3

In articulating its objectives, the next country programme should strive for more modest output descriptions that accurately reflect the substance and scope of anticipated work.

The design of the results and resources framework should be clearer on what UNDP is trying to achieve in Indonesia, and how it is progressing on these objectives. Outcome indicators are too high level to provide any practical or meaningful insight into UNDP’s impact. Output descriptions and associated output indicators should better reflect what UNDP can influence, taking into account resources and government access.
 

4

The country office should build on its strong efforts to mainstream gender equality and the empowerment of women across its programme.

While there is good evidence that the country office has a strong focus on gender mainstreaming, there are still gaps in attention to gender equality in both designs and reporting. In the next cycle, UNDP should give more consistent attention to the gender equality dimensions of its work in programme designs, regular performance reporting, and evaluations; and increase the accuracy of the gender marker rating so it better reflects likely contributions to improving gender equality. Monitoring and evaluation of gender-related outcomes should be enhanced with a view to obtaining deeper insights into the impacts of the country office’s commendable gender mainstreaming efforts.
 

Management response not available

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