The RoK-UNOSSC Facility Phase 2 has three components, the Consortium (6 Institutions), the Platform  (3 institutions) and the Scaled-Up Project with one institution. It is funded by the Ministry of Science  and ICT (MSIT) of the Republic of Korea (RoK) and implemented under the Direct Implementation (DIM) arrangement by the United Nations Office for South-South Cooperation. While two countries were selected for piloting the integrated project led by the Consortium (Cambodia and Indonesia); the scaled- up project under the Regional Cooperative Agreement Regional Office (RCARO) has 14 participating countries in the Asia-Pacific Region. The Facility budget of $4 million is made through annual contributions to UNOSSC by the government of the Republic of Korea. The Ministry of Science and ICT requested  the Steering Committee of the Facility to appoint one of the implementing institutions (STEPI) to represent the Ministry in the coordination of the participating institutions in RoK. It is a triangular cooperation capacity building Programme. 
A mid-term evaluation for the RoK-UNOSSC Facility Phase 2 (2016 – 2020) was planned and budgeted  for in compliance with the UNDP evaluation policy, relating to the scale of the project ($4 million),  and the provision in the monitoring and evaluation framework included in the Phase 2 Facility Document. The mid-term evaluation is intended to provide a comprehensive assessment of the project progress at its mid-way point to strengthen implementation for the remaining duration of the project.  
The methodology for the evaluation covered the following areas: • Desk study review of all relevant project documentation; • Consultations with Programme Management in UNOSSC, the Science and Technology Policy Institute (STEPI) as a coordinating institution in the Republic of Korea (RoK), all ten (10) participating RoK institutions, and  government counterparts in Cambodia and Indonesia. 
 
Overall, this evaluation captures the successes, challenges, and lessons learnt from implementation  of the project from 2017 and 2018. The evaluation ends with a list of recommendations generated from the analysis.