- Evaluation Plan:
- 2006-2010, Indonesia
- Evaluation Type:
- Outcome
- Planned End Date:
- 03/2011
- Completion Date:
- 04/2011
- Status:
- Completed
- Management Response:
- Yes
- Evaluation Budget(US $):
- 10,000
OUTCOME EVALUATION: Prog 1: Strengthening human development to achieve MDG
| Document | Type | Language | Size | Status | Downloads |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 TOR_PRU_outcome_eval_final.doc |
tor | English | 60.50 KB | Posted | 672 |
 OUTCOME_EVAL_MDG_POVERTY_final.pdf |
report | English | 774.95 KB | Posted | 1184 |
| Title | OUTCOME EVALUATION: Prog 1: Strengthening human development to achieve MDG | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atlas Project Number: | |||||||
| Evaluation Plan: | 2006-2010, Indonesia | ||||||
| Evaluation Type: | Outcome | ||||||
| Status: | Completed | ||||||
| Completion Date: | 04/2011 | ||||||
| Planned End Date: | 03/2011 | ||||||
| Management Response: | Yes | ||||||
| Focus Area: |
|
||||||
| Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021) |
|
||||||
| Evaluation Budget(US $): | 10,000 | ||||||
| Source of Funding: | Cost Sharing | ||||||
| Joint Programme: | No | ||||||
| Joint Evaluation: | No | ||||||
| Evaluation Team members: |
|
||||||
| GEF Evaluation: | No | ||||||
| Key Stakeholders: | |||||||
| Countries: | INDONESIA |
| Lessons | |
|---|---|
| Findings |
| Recommendations | |
|---|---|
| 1 | 1. Redirect the Focus of the Programme Component?s Poverty Reduction and Sustainable Livelihoods Cluster of Projects. The Programme needs to discontinue its attempts to reduce poverty and establish sustainable livelihoods and redirect its support towards the Government?s social protection agenda which is aimed at reducing the burdens of poverty. |
| 2 | 2. Exit the HIV/AIDS development agenda. The Programme has achieved with great success its objective of strengthening the capacities of the National AIDS Commission and the Ministry of Health in managing Indonesia?s response to HIV/AIDS as well as in accessing and managing resources from the Global Fund for AIDS, TB and Malaria (GFATM). UNDP no longer needs to provide technical support to these two agencies in the particular area of capacity building. |
| 3 | 3. Reassess the benefits or harm of UNDP?s continued Support to Papua and West Papua through PDP. The Programme?s support to the two regions is being delivered in a non-conducive environment. Furthermore, it is not aligned with the Government?s agenda for the two Provinces. UNDP needs to seriously consider the risks of continuing its intervention in the two regions through a programme such as the PDP. Alternatively, UNDP could consider supporting the Government?s conflict management agenda, an area where it has gained considerable technical expertise. |
| 4 | 4. Capitalize on UNDP?s Comparative Strength in Governance. Although UNDP may not have a specific sector or beneficiary focus, its experience in capacity-building has established the organization?s own capacity in the area of governance. UNDP needs to capitalize on this comparative advantage by taking a lead on governance not in the narrow sense of advancing democracy but in the full sense of the organization?s definition of governance as ?the exercise of economic, political and administrative authority to manage a country?s affairs at all levels?. The governance of Poverty Reduction is an area that the Programme could focus on, including and especially on the mechanisms of translating poverty reduction programmes designed at the national level for implementation at regional levels. |
| 5 | 5. Expand UNDP?s Circle of Partners in the Business of Development. Indonesia has joined the ranks of middle income countries and Private Sector Enterprises are becoming more and more the drivers of the country?s development. UNDP needs to establish working relationships with these entities towards advancing private-sector contribution towards a human development agenda. These Partnerships should not be based on ?compassion? but clearly worked out on mutually beneficial terms. |
| 6 | 6. Refrain from Implementing Stand-alone Project Level Interventions and Concentrate on Programme Level Interventions. |
| 7 | 7. Reassess and Capitalize upon UNDP?s Popular Reputation of Trusted Mediator between the Government and International Development Agencies, Programme Coordinator and Resource Mobilizer. There are different opinions on how UNDP earned its reputation of among others, trusted mediator, programme coordinator, and mobilizer of resources. Without going into the reasons why, the fact remains that during times of need UNDP did carry out these tasks extremely well. UNDP needs to consolidate these skills, breathe them into the organization?s culture and capitalize on them in the design of its forthcoming Country Programme. |
1. Recommendation: 1. Redirect the Focus of the Programme Component?s Poverty Reduction and Sustainable Livelihoods Cluster of Projects. The Programme needs to discontinue its attempts to reduce poverty and establish sustainable livelihoods and redirect its support towards the Government?s social protection agenda which is aimed at reducing the burdens of poverty.
Management Response: [Added: 2011/10/06]
We are not fully in agreement with this recommendation. Our poverty reduction programme consists of three components namely: 1) MDG and Human development - which address basic needs, 2) Social Protection ? which address basic support, 3) Regional Economic Development ? which address inclusive growth. These three components will contribute to the Government of Indonesia?s effort in reducing poverty. We fully agree on the recommendation to support the Government?s social protection agenda and it has been incorporated in the new CPAP
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| None
[Added: 2011/10/06] |
- | 2006/01 | Completed |
2. Recommendation: 2. Exit the HIV/AIDS development agenda. The Programme has achieved with great success its objective of strengthening the capacities of the National AIDS Commission and the Ministry of Health in managing Indonesia?s response to HIV/AIDS as well as in accessing and managing resources from the Global Fund for AIDS, TB and Malaria (GFATM). UNDP no longer needs to provide technical support to these two agencies in the particular area of capacity building.
Management Response: [Added: 2011/10/06]
We are not fully in agreement with this recommendation. PRU-UNDP has consistently focused on providing assistance for management capacity building aspects of HIV. Technical aspects of HIV have always been implemented by WHO, UNICEF, UNAIDs and other development agencies. Also we do not show case HIV/AIDs but present it as part of an aspect of MDG, human development and vulnerability that needs to be tackled more systematically. We need to continue supporting HIV/AIDs in a more strategic manner such as through the National Management Technical Assistance Framework effort.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Continue on support in capacity building of Government of Indonesia
[Added: 2011/10/06] |
Poverty Reduction Unit | 2011/07 | Completed |
3. Recommendation: 3. Reassess the benefits or harm of UNDP?s continued Support to Papua and West Papua through PDP. The Programme?s support to the two regions is being delivered in a non-conducive environment. Furthermore, it is not aligned with the Government?s agenda for the two Provinces. UNDP needs to seriously consider the risks of continuing its intervention in the two regions through a programme such as the PDP. Alternatively, UNDP could consider supporting the Government?s conflict management agenda, an area where it has gained considerable technical expertise.
Management Response: [Added: 2011/10/06]
We disagree on this recommendation. Government of Indonesia has revitalized the Presidential Instruction 7/2009 through a new presidential regulation on Acceleration of Development of Papua and West Papua. The Government of Indonesia (Min of Home Affair and Bappenas) has requested UNDP involvement in refining the special autonomy (OTSUS) initiative for Papua. We are now supporting UP4B (unit to accelerate development in Papua and West Papua) at the vice president level (through UKP4 =Presidential Unit for development, supervision and oversight) and supporting UP3 and UP3B in both provinces. Papua is mentioned as a focus area for development in the CPAP, CPAD and UNPDF. The ADR also recommends that UNDP Indonesia?s geographical focus (Papua, NTT, Aceh) should be continued.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| None
[Added: 2011/10/06] |
None | 2006/01 | Completed |
4. Recommendation: 4. Capitalize on UNDP?s Comparative Strength in Governance. Although UNDP may not have a specific sector or beneficiary focus, its experience in capacity-building has established the organization?s own capacity in the area of governance. UNDP needs to capitalize on this comparative advantage by taking a lead on governance not in the narrow sense of advancing democracy but in the full sense of the organization?s definition of governance as ?the exercise of economic, political and administrative authority to manage a country?s affairs at all levels?. The governance of Poverty Reduction is an area that the Programme could focus on, including and especially on the mechanisms of translating poverty reduction programmes designed at the national level for implementation at regional levels.
Management Response: [Added: 2011/10/06]
There are common entry points / areas for joint programming on poverty and governance but as stated in the CPD and CPAP the two programmes also have their own scope.
Key Actions:
5. Recommendation: 5. Expand UNDP?s Circle of Partners in the Business of Development. Indonesia has joined the ranks of middle income countries and Private Sector Enterprises are becoming more and more the drivers of the country?s development. UNDP needs to establish working relationships with these entities towards advancing private-sector contribution towards a human development agenda. These Partnerships should not be based on ?compassion? but clearly worked out on mutually beneficial terms.
Management Response: [Added: 2011/10/06]
We fully agree on this recommendation and we are working on it. As outlined in the CPAP, we will support GOI to develop a strategy and mechanism for the implementation of PPP and CSR.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Develop strategy and scheme for partnership with private sector;
We also support GOI in the formulation rules and laws for partnership with the private sectors
[Added: 2011/10/06] |
Poverty Reduction Unit | 2011/07 | Completed |
6. Recommendation: 6. Refrain from Implementing Stand-alone Project Level Interventions and Concentrate on Programme Level Interventions.
Management Response: [Added: 2011/10/06]
We fully agree on this recommendation and we are working on it. Our approach is to shift the focus from a high number of individual and relatively small size projects towards the achievement of strategic results. Geographical focus as mentioned in recommendation #3 is also meant for reducing the implementation of stand-alone small projects. Multiyear budgeting will be implemented to avoid the development of small projects.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Continues effort to minimize development of new small project. Use RBM as a tool in this effort.
[Added: 2011/10/06] |
Poverty Reduction Unit | 2011/07 | Completed |
7. Recommendation: 7. Reassess and Capitalize upon UNDP?s Popular Reputation of Trusted Mediator between the Government and International Development Agencies, Programme Coordinator and Resource Mobilizer. There are different opinions on how UNDP earned its reputation of among others, trusted mediator, programme coordinator, and mobilizer of resources. Without going into the reasons why, the fact remains that during times of need UNDP did carry out these tasks extremely well. UNDP needs to consolidate these skills, breathe them into the organization?s culture and capitalize on them in the design of its forthcoming Country Programme.
Management Response: [Added: 2011/10/06]
We agree on this recommendation although it is not very clear what the recommendation points to. The situation on resource mobilization issues is changing rapidly. As stated in the Jakarta Commitment GoI aims to strengthen country ownership over development. GoI is now developing guidelines for the mobilization and management of multi-donor funds with the aim that government will be the trustee for the management of the fund.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Continue resource mobilization plan in line with priorities outlined in CPD and CPAP
[Added: 2011/10/06] |
Poverty Reduction Unit | 2011/07 | Completed |