CPAP 2007-2011 TERMINAL EVALUATION

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2007-2011, Eritrea
Evaluation Type:
Outcome
Planned End Date:
12/2011
Completion Date:
12/2011
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
18,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document TOR-FINAL CPAP EVALUATION-FINALDRAFT 27 June 2011.docx tor English 46.18 KB Posted 500
Download document Final Draft CPAP Terminal Evaluation.docx report English 369.48 KB Posted 1295
Download document CPAP TERMINAL EVALUATION Executive Summary.docx summary English 26.22 KB Posted 442
Title CPAP 2007-2011 TERMINAL EVALUATION
Atlas Project Number:
Evaluation Plan: 2007-2011, Eritrea
Evaluation Type: Outcome
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 12/2011
Planned End Date: 12/2011
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Poverty and MDG
  • 2. Democratic Governance
  • 3. Crisis Prevention & Recovery
  • 4. Cross-cutting Development Issue
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017)
  • 1. Capacities of national and local institutions enhanced to scale up proven MDG acceleration interventions and to plan, monitor, report and evaluate the MDG progress in the context of related national development priorities
  • 2. Strengthened national capacities for implementation of HIV funds and programmes, including those financed through multilateral initiatives like the Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria
  • 3. Effective, responsive, accessible and fair justice systems promote the rule of law, including both formal and informal processes, with due consideration on the rights of the poor, women and vulnerable groups
  • 4. Livelihoods and economic recovery generated, including infrastructure restoration, employment and sustainable income earning opportunities for crisis affected communities
  • 5. UNDP programmes/projects integrate gender equality and women's empowerment in line with the UNDP gender equality strategy, 2008-2011
  • 6. 2.7.1 Improved efficiency and equity in the delivery of public services
Evaluation Budget(US $): 18,000
Source of Funding: UNDP
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Team Leader
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders:
Countries: ERITREA
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1 1. The current 18-month programme with GoSE, represents a relatively new experience for UNDP. In the event that GoSE decides to continue along the same path of cooperation by extending the framework agreement beyond December 2012, it would be important to seriously take stock of what has been realized from a programming perspective, as well as the implications for UNDP internal arrangements. This would provide important inputs into the future work of UNDP in Eritrea.
2 2. UNDP has invested heavily in many development activities and worked extensively with many partners. The abrupt end to such support leaves many questions unanswered: there is visible impact of UNDP at all levels ? would this be lost? Or has the programme reached such a level that IPs can now forge ahead on their own? UNDP capacity building ? institutions are at a threshold were they can move forward. Are Line Ministries may be in better position than the mass organizations? Therefore it would be important to assess the extent to which IPs are able to carry on activities ? in other words, there is need to assess the sustainability of UNDP?s support when the current framework ends in December 2012.
3 3. Regardless of the nature of the future programme with Government, UNDP should make greater efforts to integrate the work of its different units. In this regard the role of the Poverty unit needs particular scrutiny ? strengthened collaboration with the environment unit and greater emphasis on supporting research to facilitate better understanding of the dynamics of poverty in Eritrea, rather than just replicate and manage similar interventions.
4 4. When the Government comes back to the UNDP on or before April 2012, detailing its future plans, and if such plans include at least two of the UNDP Practice areas, it would then be prudent to restructure the current programmes into two distinct categories, namely one programme for Upstream Interventions and one programme on Down Stream activities. The Upstream Programme may include activities related to micro-policy, implementation of draft national policies in the public and Environment sectors, Poverty Reduction, Food Security, Environment and Development, Climate Change, Energy, etc.). The Down Stream programme may include all activities prioritized by the Government and working with regional, sub- regional and Kebabi administrations, that the UNDP has accumulated a lot of credibility and experience (such as building micro-dams and bore hole based water systems, affordable shelter, school and health facilities, support to farmers, and capacity building at the sub-region and Kebabi levels). The UNDP core resources are dwindling every year and the resource mobilization will be a difficult exercise. Based on our experience, it may be strategic to call the Down Stream programme ?Transition from Emergency to long term Development? which may attract our traditional donors to continue their support.
1. Recommendation: 1. The current 18-month programme with GoSE, represents a relatively new experience for UNDP. In the event that GoSE decides to continue along the same path of cooperation by extending the framework agreement beyond December 2012, it would be important to seriously take stock of what has been realized from a programming perspective, as well as the implications for UNDP internal arrangements. This would provide important inputs into the future work of UNDP in Eritrea.
Management Response: [Added: 2012/01/13]

The recommendation made by the independent consultant is fully accepted. hence, should the government extend the existing cooperation framework beyond 2012, the new framework cooperation will take into account the recomended programme perspective.

Key Actions:

2. Recommendation: 2. UNDP has invested heavily in many development activities and worked extensively with many partners. The abrupt end to such support leaves many questions unanswered: there is visible impact of UNDP at all levels ? would this be lost? Or has the programme reached such a level that IPs can now forge ahead on their own? UNDP capacity building ? institutions are at a threshold were they can move forward. Are Line Ministries may be in better position than the mass organizations? Therefore it would be important to assess the extent to which IPs are able to carry on activities ? in other words, there is need to assess the sustainability of UNDP?s support when the current framework ends in December 2012.
Management Response: [Added: 2012/01/13]

Recommendatin number two is desirable by the CO, however, such exercise would require the engagement and support of the government. To this effect. the CO will monitor the situaiton int he country to assess such an exercise can be carried out.

Key Actions:

3. Recommendation: 3. Regardless of the nature of the future programme with Government, UNDP should make greater efforts to integrate the work of its different units. In this regard the role of the Poverty unit needs particular scrutiny ? strengthened collaboration with the environment unit and greater emphasis on supporting research to facilitate better understanding of the dynamics of poverty in Eritrea, rather than just replicate and manage similar interventions.
Management Response: [Added: 2012/01/13]

Agreed, the CO will ensure in its future programme (UN Eritrea development coopoeration is extended beyond 2012) to develop an integrated development programme that brings different practice area.

Key Actions:

4. Recommendation: 4. When the Government comes back to the UNDP on or before April 2012, detailing its future plans, and if such plans include at least two of the UNDP Practice areas, it would then be prudent to restructure the current programmes into two distinct categories, namely one programme for Upstream Interventions and one programme on Down Stream activities. The Upstream Programme may include activities related to micro-policy, implementation of draft national policies in the public and Environment sectors, Poverty Reduction, Food Security, Environment and Development, Climate Change, Energy, etc.). The Down Stream programme may include all activities prioritized by the Government and working with regional, sub- regional and Kebabi administrations, that the UNDP has accumulated a lot of credibility and experience (such as building micro-dams and bore hole based water systems, affordable shelter, school and health facilities, support to farmers, and capacity building at the sub-region and Kebabi levels). The UNDP core resources are dwindling every year and the resource mobilization will be a difficult exercise. Based on our experience, it may be strategic to call the Down Stream programme ?Transition from Emergency to long term Development? which may attract our traditional donors to continue their support.
Management Response: [Added: 2012/01/13]

The government of Eritrea prioritize/prefers more concrete down stream intervention. However, UNDP with other UN agencies will advocate for an upstream level of intervention.

Key Actions:

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