PAR MP 2001-2010

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2006-2011, Viet Nam
Evaluation Type:
Project
Planned End Date:
09/2006
Completion Date:
07/2006
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
35,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document 00015591 - PAR MP - TOR.doc tor Posted 791
Download document 00015591 - PAR MP - Eval Rep.pdf report English Posted 977
Download document 00015591 - PAR MP - Lessons&Recom.pdf summary Posted 453
Title PAR MP 2001-2010
Atlas Project Number:
Evaluation Plan: 2006-2011, Viet Nam
Evaluation Type: Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 07/2006
Planned End Date: 09/2006
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Democratic Governance
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
Evaluation Budget(US $): 35,000
Source of Funding:
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Nationality
Jens Brinch, Nguyen Thi Thanh Hang, Tran Quoc Trung Team Leader
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders:
Countries: VIET NAM
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1 Identified outcomes too ambitious given the complexity of PAR and project's limited scope, resources and time frame
2 Weaknesses in project management capacity had negative impact on performance and timely delivery of certain outputs
3 PAR Support Facility lacks clear focus and result orientation
4 Weaknesses in government - donor policy dialogue and project reporting
5 Adopt a programme-based approach with clear results-orientation and links to the SEDP
6 Consider a multi-stakeholder programme board model as an alternative to a Steering Committee mechanism in the new programme. Sufficient and qualified project staff to be in place at the outset of the new programme.
7 Introduce clearly defined approach to how to manage funds for ad-hoc activities. Promote principles of the Hanoi Core Statement in area of financial management
8 Reorient the PSF into a multi-donor trust fund managed by UNDP, responding to innovation and replication needs
9 Strengthen UNDP's lead role in policy dialogue and coordination
10 Ensure involvement of the LMDG in the assessment and appraisal process related to the formulation of the new programme
11 Extend current project to allow adequate bridging period
12 Ensure focus on completion of priority activities/outputs during the remainder of the existing project
1. Recommendation: Identified outcomes too ambitious given the complexity of PAR and project's limited scope, resources and time frame
Management Response: [Added: 2006/12/12]

Agree

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
A comprehensive situation and stakeholders' capacity analysis will be undertaken at the design phase of the new programme to ensure that outcomes are Smartly designed
[Added: 2006/12/12] [Last Updated: 2010/01/19]
UNDP and PAR SC 2010/01 Completed
2. Recommendation: Weaknesses in project management capacity had negative impact on performance and timely delivery of certain outputs
Management Response: [Added: 2006/12/12]

Agree

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Ensure integration of PMU with the Secretariat of the PAR SC in the new programme, and the sufficient availability and capacity of project staff
[Added: 2006/12/12] [Last Updated: 2008/01/16]
UNDP and PAR SC 2008/12 Completed The project was completed; the issue will be reflected in the next phase
3. Recommendation: PAR Support Facility lacks clear focus and result orientation
Management Response: [Added: 2006/12/12]

Agree

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Fund pooling facility in the new programme should be of a different character - e.g. more broad based and result-oriented. Clear selection criteria should also be ensured.
[Added: 2006/12/12] [Last Updated: 2010/01/19]
UNDP, PAR SC and MPI 2010/01 Completed
4. Recommendation: Weaknesses in government - donor policy dialogue and project reporting
Management Response: [Added: 2006/12/12]

Agree. This shortcoming is mainly due to the disconnect between the PMU and the PAR Steering Committee

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Establish a more regular and substantive policy dialogue lead by the PAR SC as part of the new programme. Project reporting to be standardised.
[Added: 2006/12/12] [Last Updated: 2010/01/19]
UNDP, PAR SC and MoHA 2010/01 Completed
5. Recommendation: Adopt a programme-based approach with clear results-orientation and links to the SEDP
Management Response: [Added: 2006/12/12]

Agree

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
To be introduced in new support programme
[Added: 2006/12/12] [Last Updated: 2010/01/19]
UNDP and PAR SC 2010/01 Completed
6. Recommendation: Consider a multi-stakeholder programme board model as an alternative to a Steering Committee mechanism in the new programme. Sufficient and qualified project staff to be in place at the outset of the new programme.
Management Response: [Added: 2006/12/12]

Agree. To be considered pending the decision on the PAR MP management structure, mandate and staffing.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Programme Management Board could be established, including representatives of Government, UNDP and cost-sharing donors.
[Added: 2006/12/12] [Last Updated: 2010/01/19]
UNDP, PAR SC and MPI 2010/01 Completed
7. Recommendation: Introduce clearly defined approach to how to manage funds for ad-hoc activities. Promote principles of the Hanoi Core Statement in area of financial management
Management Response: [Added: 2006/12/12]

Agree

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Principles for ad-hoc activities to be defined in programme document. Result-oriented financial management mechanism to be worked out during the design of the new programme
[Added: 2006/12/12] [Last Updated: 2010/01/19]
UNDP, PAR SC and MPI 2010/01 Completed
8. Recommendation: Reorient the PSF into a multi-donor trust fund managed by UNDP, responding to innovation and replication needs
Management Response: [Added: 2006/12/12]

Partly agree

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
A trust fund model for a new PSF mechanism will be explored as part of the formulation of the new programme. Agreement on ownership needs to be further discussed
[Added: 2006/12/12] [Last Updated: 2010/01/19]
UNDP, PAR SC and MPI 2010/01 Completed
9. Recommendation: Strengthen UNDP's lead role in policy dialogue and coordination
Management Response: [Added: 2006/12/12]

Agree. Both UNDP's and the government's capacity should be enhanced, with the ownership clearly vested in the latter.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
To be addressed during the formulation of the new programme and in the context of the upcoming UNDP Governance Portfolio Review exercise.
[Added: 2006/12/12] [Last Updated: 2010/01/19]
UNDP and PAR SC 2010/01 Completed
10. Recommendation: Ensure involvement of the LMDG in the assessment and appraisal process related to the formulation of the new programme
Management Response: [Added: 2006/12/12]

Agree. LMDG has been closely involved throughout the formulation process.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Organise further consultative events including a LPAC meeting on the draft final programme document
[Added: 2006/12/12] [Last Updated: 2010/01/19]
UNDP 2010/01 Completed
11. Recommendation: Extend current project to allow adequate bridging period
Management Response: [Added: 2006/12/12]

Agree. This is critical to ensure completion of outstanding activities and outputs.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
UNDP will consult with MoHA and MPI on this issue
[Added: 2006/12/12] [Last Updated: 2006/12/26]
UNDP, MPI and MoHA 2006/12 Completed
12. Recommendation: Ensure focus on completion of priority activities/outputs during the remainder of the existing project
Management Response: [Added: 2006/12/12]

Agree

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
An output-based work plan for the extension period should be developed and submitted to MPI and UNDP together with a request for additional funds, if any.
[Added: 2006/12/12] [Last Updated: 2006/12/26]
MoHA 2006/12 Completed

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