Strengthening Representative and Legislative Capacity of the Parliament (Fiji)

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2003-2007, Fiji
Evaluation Type:
Project
Planned End Date:
05/2007
Completion Date:
06/2007
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
--

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document PSP TOR May 2007.doc tor Posted 591
Download document Fiji - PSP Evaluation report - FINAL.pdf report Posted 1113
Title Strengthening Representative and Legislative Capacity of the Parliament (Fiji)
Atlas Project Number:
Evaluation Plan: 2003-2007, Fiji
Evaluation Type: Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 06/2007
Planned End Date: 05/2007
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Democratic Governance
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017)
Evaluation Budget(US $): --
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Robert Nakamura Team Leader
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders:
Countries: FIJI
Comments: Multi-Country project evaluation done in Fiji, RMI, Solomon Islands and PNG
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1
2 UNDP should convene a meeting with key Government and Parliamentary Stakeholders as a matter of priority to discuss the future of the programme
3 UNDP should retain the option of acting quickly and effectively by retaining the Project Manager and an agreed number of graduates to assist him
4 UNDP should strongly urge the Interim Government to retain at least a skeleton staff, including the Acting General Secretary, the Senate Secretary and the Division Head
5 Re-consider the inclusion of graduate trainees program in projects where the Parliamentary Secretary has already a sizable staff who are themselves in need of capacity building.
6 Consider developing an on-going professional development programme for Members of Parliament that addresses specific development issues such as the implementation of the MDGs; and incorporate this programme into the future planning documentation
7 Ensure that the future (re-design) of the project recognises the future unstable political environment within the Parliamentary Secretariat and integrate conflict-sensitive programming accordingly
8 Ensure all project documents must properly identify all key risks and strategies must be integrated into the project design.
9 Include indicators in the project design which are qualitative, quantitative and/or time bound (QQT) and capable of being monitored and include guidance in the Project Design regarding the methods of assessing indicators
10 Consider the identification of a ?signature activity? for subsequent parliamentary support programs. Choose an activity that is visible, is useful to a variety of parliamentary stakeholders, and which has the promise of sustainability if it develops supporters.
11 Subsequent programming should proceed on the basis that the basic needs of the Fijian Parliament identified in the LNA continue to require support.
12 Sustainability planning should be integrated into individual activities as well as overarching components, particularly at the point of redesign.
13 The project should provide training and/or identify training opportunities (offered by other parliaments and parliamentary assistance organizations) to better equip the Secretariat?s management to delegate, mentor and train Parliamentary staff
14 The UNDP project provide support to senior secretariat staff to review and revise the Secretariat organizational structure and position description in collaboration with the Public Service Commission. Funds should be made available to bring in an expert human resource consultant with Parliamentary evidence if requested by the Secretary.
15 The Project should work to clear up the back-log of Secretariat work in the procedural office ? journals and Speaker?s rulings and other areas according to priorities established by the Project manager in consultation with other stakeholders.
16 The Project should support codification and systematization of the procedures in both Houses of Parliament (through the review of the standing orders) for the management of committee business, for the management of information systems, and other operational matters.
17 Any redesign of programming to prepare for the new parliament should consider programming on conflict, gender, human rights and MDG delivered through activities centred on discussions that Parliament will have to make.
18 The role and responsibilities of the Project Manager should be spelled out in the Project Document, and should include appropriate qualifications and clarification of their role in subsequent refinement of the Project Design.
19 Appoint a Project Manager as the first step in the implementation process, especially when the Project Design requires the management of multiple components.
20 The operational role of the Secretary General should be in favour of a broader policy making and otherwise oversight role. The Project Manager and a counterpart at senior management level should be responsible for day-to-day operational issues.
21 All reporting templates should include a requirement to report on risk identification and management.
22 Review the necessity of current reporting and meeting requirements.
23 Communicate more clearly and regularly with MOF and the Project Manager regarding financial management issues, including anticipated disbursement and financial reporting requirements.
24 Ensure that management channels within the MCO are clear and all parties understand their roles so that staffs have clear lines of accountability when dealing with more complex strategic issues such as handling a project following a coup.
25 Review the ?management by exception? approach to project management with a view of ensuring that the UNDP MCO is alert for opportunities to engage in support of projects
26 Clarify who within the UNDP MCO has overall responsibility for project monitoring and specifically, what the role of the DSU and Thematic Advisors in relation to project staff and in relation to each other.
27 Provide proper briefings to Project Managers regarding their reporting requirements and provide reporting templates to Project Managers (for annual reports and quarterly reports).
28 Ensure that Project staff and responsible parties at UNDP hold regular meetings and phone conferences to discuss project activities and problems so that the participants are aware of what is happening and why.
29 The officer with responsibility for strategic oversight of the Project and strategic decision making within UNDP MCO must be clearly identified.
30 Minimize the delays by processing decision in parallel rather than serially, in so far as possible.
31 At the point it became clear that donor funding was not immediately available to the Project, consideration should have been given to a re-design, so that the Project had realistic objectives vis a vis available resources, A redesign point could have included to account for up scaling of the project if/when donor resources become available.
32 Decisions about programmatic aspects must be made quickly after the needs assessment so that donor commitments can be secured and implementation progressed under the most favourable conditions.
1. Recommendation:
Management Response: [Added: 2008/01/07]

Key Actions:

2. Recommendation: UNDP should convene a meeting with key Government and Parliamentary Stakeholders as a matter of priority to discuss the future of the programme
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation noted. Discussions will proceed towards Phase II of the project, pending indications of the re-establishment of democratic processors in Fiji

Key Actions:

3. Recommendation: UNDP should retain the option of acting quickly and effectively by retaining the Project Manager and an agreed number of graduates to assist him
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted but pending available funding

Key Actions:

4. Recommendation: UNDP should strongly urge the Interim Government to retain at least a skeleton staff, including the Acting General Secretary, the Senate Secretary and the Division Head
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation noted but given the partnership between UNDP and the Fiji Government, and the current staffing arrangements in Parliament, no action is recommended

Key Actions:

5. Recommendation: Re-consider the inclusion of graduate trainees program in projects where the Parliamentary Secretary has already a sizable staff who are themselves in need of capacity building.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted in so far as a short term measure to address capacity issues in Parliament. Review of organizational restructuring currently underway should lead to long term measures.

Key Actions:

6. Recommendation: Consider developing an on-going professional development programme for Members of Parliament that addresses specific development issues such as the implementation of the MDGs; and incorporate this programme into the future planning documentation
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted and accepted. Design of Phase II of the project will explore with the Government of Fiji options for sustainable development training programmes

Key Actions:

7. Recommendation: Ensure that the future (re-design) of the project recognises the future unstable political environment within the Parliamentary Secretariat and integrate conflict-sensitive programming accordingly
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted but UNDP to explore how this can be done within the Parliamentary processors

Key Actions:

8. Recommendation: Ensure all project documents must properly identify all key risks and strategies must be integrated into the project design.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is acknowledged with a caveat that since the design of this project, UNDP has since adopted a Results orientation in the design of its projects

Key Actions:

9. Recommendation: Include indicators in the project design which are qualitative, quantitative and/or time bound (QQT) and capable of being monitored and include guidance in the Project Design regarding the methods of assessing indicators
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Response is same as the above

Key Actions:

10. Recommendation: Consider the identification of a ?signature activity? for subsequent parliamentary support programs. Choose an activity that is visible, is useful to a variety of parliamentary stakeholders, and which has the promise of sustainability if it develops supporters.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted and accepted for integration into Phase II design of the next project.

Key Actions:

11. Recommendation: Subsequent programming should proceed on the basis that the basic needs of the Fijian Parliament identified in the LNA continue to require support.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted and accepted for integration into Phase II design of the next project.

Key Actions:

12. Recommendation: Sustainability planning should be integrated into individual activities as well as overarching components, particularly at the point of redesign.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted and accepted

Key Actions:

13. Recommendation: The project should provide training and/or identify training opportunities (offered by other parliaments and parliamentary assistance organizations) to better equip the Secretariat?s management to delegate, mentor and train Parliamentary staff
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted in so far as the strengthening of HR capacity through normal government systems and programming.

Key Actions:

14. Recommendation: The UNDP project provide support to senior secretariat staff to review and revise the Secretariat organizational structure and position description in collaboration with the Public Service Commission. Funds should be made available to bring in an expert human resource consultant with Parliamentary evidence if requested by the Secretary.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted and accepted to be integrated into Phase II design of the Project.

Key Actions:

15. Recommendation: The Project should work to clear up the back-log of Secretariat work in the procedural office ? journals and Speaker?s rulings and other areas according to priorities established by the Project manager in consultation with other stakeholders.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted and accepted to be further integrated into Phase II of the project

Key Actions:

16. Recommendation: The Project should support codification and systematization of the procedures in both Houses of Parliament (through the review of the standing orders) for the management of committee business, for the management of information systems, and other operational matters.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted and accepted. The Current UNDP project is exploring e-documentation with further work to be integrated into Phase II of the project design.

Key Actions:

17. Recommendation: Any redesign of programming to prepare for the new parliament should consider programming on conflict, gender, human rights and MDG delivered through activities centred on discussions that Parliament will have to make.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation noted but UNDP will explore how this can be done within Government systems sustainably.

Key Actions:

18. Recommendation: The role and responsibilities of the Project Manager should be spelled out in the Project Document, and should include appropriate qualifications and clarification of their role in subsequent refinement of the Project Design.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted with exception that at the design of the currently project, UNDP had not adopted the Prince II methodology which now incorporates these issues.

Key Actions:

19. Recommendation: Appoint a Project Manager as the first step in the implementation process, especially when the Project Design requires the management of multiple components.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted in so far UNDP?s attempts in the first instance to appoint a Project Manager at the LPAC stage

Key Actions:

20. Recommendation: The operational role of the Secretary General should be in favour of a broader policy making and otherwise oversight role. The Project Manager and a counterpart at senior management level should be responsible for day-to-day operational issues.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted. (The former SG wanted to play a more active role in the implementation and management of this process)

Key Actions:

21. Recommendation: All reporting templates should include a requirement to report on risk identification and management.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted and accepted to be included into Phase II of the project.

Key Actions:

22. Recommendation: Review the necessity of current reporting and meeting requirements.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation noted

Key Actions:

23. Recommendation: Communicate more clearly and regularly with MOF and the Project Manager regarding financial management issues, including anticipated disbursement and financial reporting requirements.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation noted and be integrated into Phase II

Key Actions:

24. Recommendation: Ensure that management channels within the MCO are clear and all parties understand their roles so that staffs have clear lines of accountability when dealing with more complex strategic issues such as handling a project following a coup.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation noted

Key Actions:

25. Recommendation: Review the ?management by exception? approach to project management with a view of ensuring that the UNDP MCO is alert for opportunities to engage in support of projects
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation noted.

Key Actions:

26. Recommendation: Clarify who within the UNDP MCO has overall responsibility for project monitoring and specifically, what the role of the DSU and Thematic Advisors in relation to project staff and in relation to each other.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted in so far as the need for the Project to understand the strong inter-relationship roles between Thematic and DSU.

Key Actions:

27. Recommendation: Provide proper briefings to Project Managers regarding their reporting requirements and provide reporting templates to Project Managers (for annual reports and quarterly reports).
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted and will be integrated into induction programmes for Project Managers

Key Actions:

28. Recommendation: Ensure that Project staff and responsible parties at UNDP hold regular meetings and phone conferences to discuss project activities and problems so that the participants are aware of what is happening and why.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted

Key Actions:

29. Recommendation: The officer with responsibility for strategic oversight of the Project and strategic decision making within UNDP MCO must be clearly identified.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted in so far as oversight role of the project and strategic direction rests with the Thematic Unit and not one individual.

Key Actions:

30. Recommendation: Minimize the delays by processing decision in parallel rather than serially, in so far as possible.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation noted

Key Actions:

31. Recommendation: At the point it became clear that donor funding was not immediately available to the Project, consideration should have been given to a re-design, so that the Project had realistic objectives vis a vis available resources, A redesign point could have included to account for up scaling of the project if/when donor resources become available.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted and accepted.

Key Actions:

32. Recommendation: Decisions about programmatic aspects must be made quickly after the needs assessment so that donor commitments can be secured and implementation progressed under the most favourable conditions.
Management Response: [Added: 2010/02/01]

Recommendation is noted in so far as Donor support is integral to all of UNDPs project design and any delay in implementation would be due to funding constraints.

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