Mine Action Capacity Building Programme

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2007-2011, Eritrea
Evaluation Type:
Project
Planned End Date:
08/2008
Completion Date:
06/2008
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
6,000,000
Eritrea has a major landmine/UXO contamination problem dating from the struggle for independence with Ethiopia (1961 - 1991) with more mines laid in the later border dispute (1998-2000). UNDP in consultation with the Government and relevant stakeholders, through the mechanism of the Preparatory Assistance for Mine Action, initiated the Mine Action Capacity Building Programme (MACBP) in 2002. This two-year programme was subsequently revised and was extended to 2006 (i.e. MACBP 2002 - 2006). The objective of the MACBP was to expand national capacity for mine action. In particular, it aimed to build capacity in the EDA for the development and implementation of a National Strategic Plan for Mine Action, including carrying out a landmine impact survey (LIS); capacity building of the EDO (now integrated with EDA) as the national NGO responsible for mine clearance and mine risk education; and strengthening the capacity of the Ministry of Labour and Human Welfare (MLHW), the Eritrean ministry responsible for all disabled people in the country, including the War-Affected and landmine victims. Field demining activities under the Mine Action Capacity Building Programme were temporarily suspended following the impoundment (in March 2005) of the programme vehicles by the Government to rationalise the use of fuel. Some small activity continues in the form of resource provision to support clearance in support of the UN IDP programme. This evaluation was carried out on behalf of UNDP at the request of the donor community. The Evaluation team were asked to examine documentation and interview stakeholders with a view to understanding and documenting what happened in MACBP and also to identify some lessons learned and possible ideas for re-engagement in the mine action sector in Eritrea. Overall, the Evaluation Team finds that the intention of the MACBP was good and its direction, as expressed by the general thrust of the Strategic Plan was appropriate. However i

Share

Title Mine Action Capacity Building Programme
Atlas Project Number:
Evaluation Plan: 2007-2011, Eritrea
Evaluation Type: Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 06/2008
Planned End Date: 08/2008
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Environment & Sustainable Development
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017)
Evaluation Budget(US $): 6,000,000
Source of Funding:
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Team Leader
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders:
Countries: ERITREA
Comments: This evaluation is a mandatory evaluation requested by the donor (EU)
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1 Recommendations The recommendations made by the Evaluation Team in this report are presented in two parts: the first are responses to specific questions raised in the TOR; for ease of reference the original questions are set out below before each recommendation. The second part is a summary of general recommendations made by the Evaluation Team in this report. Relevance  Question: Considering the country context what needs to be done and/or changed to ensure continued relevance of mine action support within the country?  Recommendation: Mine action support should continue to support the settlement of IDP; other activities should focus on the clearance of highest priority agricultural land in the medium term.  Recommendation. An expanded strategic working group, including "customers‟ of mine action services such as the Ministry of Agriculture, will help improve the relevance of mine action in Eritrea and improve communications between stakeholders. Efficiency  Question: What actions should be taken by all parties to ensure that national capacity is developed?  Recommendation: A scoping exercise should be undertaken to establish how much work should be done in support of priority tasks in the medium term, and a needs assessment should be undertaken to determine what is needed in terms of capacity development. Some tasks have already been identified and are set out in this report, but the strength of feeling about previous technical assistance and capacity development means that this will need a more detailed analysis than was possible by this Evaluation Team. Sustainability  Question: What steps should be taken by all partners to ensure management and financial sustainability?  Recommendation: The use of a NEX modality, with UNDP assisting in project design, appraisal and evaluation, is seen as more appropriate for sustained funding in the medium term and will underwrite Eritrean ownership of the program.  Recommendation: The establishment of an appropriate monitoring and evaluation regime on behalf of the donors, facilitated by the government of Eritrea, will help in confidence building and encourage donor support in the medium term.  Recommendation. Eventually, the Government of Eritrea will need to take on the support of a sustainable capacity able to deal with residual contamination. An early commitment by the Government of Eritrea to this long term duty will doubtless encourage donor support in the medium term. MACBP Final Evaluation June 2008 R Keeley and T Haile Page 29 Summary of recommendations The following bullet points are intended to act as a summary of recommendations made in this report for ease of reference. 1. There is a continued need for mine action in Eritrea and stakeholders are encouraged to re-engage to support this process. 2. Any new mine action program should be conducted under a NEX modality; UNDP can be a intermediary for funds but bilateral support may also be possible 3. The size of the requirement should be developed in a transparent and objective manner using a scoping exercise to identify which categories of land should be cleared to make Eritrea "impact free‟. Appeals for donor funding should be focussed on support for these more important areas. An exit strategy for donor funding can also be agreed based on the findings of this scoping study. 4. At the same time, it is appropriate to develop a more sustainable capacity with a size commensurate to the likely size of the residual contamination problem and the ability of the Government of Eritrea to fund it. 5. The existing strategic working group should be expanded to facilitate oversight and national ownership of the mine action program, as well as improving communication between stakeholders 6. The original use of a single project document for UNDP support was unwieldy. Separate project documents should be designed for the different elements of assistance, such as capacity development of the residual capacity, operational support to mine clearance in the mid term, and for victim support. Other project documents can be added as the need arises, and separate project documents can capture specific donor procedural needs. 7. Technical assistance should be focussed and time bound. Whilst there is agreement on the need for a single long-term strategic technical advisor, the provision of other technical assistance for specific capability gaps should be carefully designed using a training needs analysis process to ensure the assistance is demand driven and provides value for money. 8. There is a procedural need to compare the current national technical standards with IMAS to satisfy donor sensibilities about risk and liability. A common-sense, collaborative approach including suitable risk-management approaches should be able to accomplish this without a return to the past confrontations on this issue. 9. Donors will need access to an effective monitoring and evaluation process in order to provide them with a reasonable level of oversight on how their funds are being expended. This monitoring and evaluation process can be done on a periodic basis but the monitors will need the support of the government to allow them to access the work sites. 10. Early "buy-in‟ to this re-engagement process by Eritrean officials at the highest level will greatly improve stakeholder confidence and facilitate the development of appeals for new funding by the end of 2008.
1. Recommendation: Recommendations The recommendations made by the Evaluation Team in this report are presented in two parts: the first are responses to specific questions raised in the TOR; for ease of reference the original questions are set out below before each recommendation. The second part is a summary of general recommendations made by the Evaluation Team in this report. Relevance  Question: Considering the country context what needs to be done and/or changed to ensure continued relevance of mine action support within the country?  Recommendation: Mine action support should continue to support the settlement of IDP; other activities should focus on the clearance of highest priority agricultural land in the medium term.  Recommendation. An expanded strategic working group, including "customers‟ of mine action services such as the Ministry of Agriculture, will help improve the relevance of mine action in Eritrea and improve communications between stakeholders. Efficiency  Question: What actions should be taken by all parties to ensure that national capacity is developed?  Recommendation: A scoping exercise should be undertaken to establish how much work should be done in support of priority tasks in the medium term, and a needs assessment should be undertaken to determine what is needed in terms of capacity development. Some tasks have already been identified and are set out in this report, but the strength of feeling about previous technical assistance and capacity development means that this will need a more detailed analysis than was possible by this Evaluation Team. Sustainability  Question: What steps should be taken by all partners to ensure management and financial sustainability?  Recommendation: The use of a NEX modality, with UNDP assisting in project design, appraisal and evaluation, is seen as more appropriate for sustained funding in the medium term and will underwrite Eritrean ownership of the program.  Recommendation: The establishment of an appropriate monitoring and evaluation regime on behalf of the donors, facilitated by the government of Eritrea, will help in confidence building and encourage donor support in the medium term.  Recommendation. Eventually, the Government of Eritrea will need to take on the support of a sustainable capacity able to deal with residual contamination. An early commitment by the Government of Eritrea to this long term duty will doubtless encourage donor support in the medium term. MACBP Final Evaluation June 2008 R Keeley and T Haile Page 29 Summary of recommendations The following bullet points are intended to act as a summary of recommendations made in this report for ease of reference. 1. There is a continued need for mine action in Eritrea and stakeholders are encouraged to re-engage to support this process. 2. Any new mine action program should be conducted under a NEX modality; UNDP can be a intermediary for funds but bilateral support may also be possible 3. The size of the requirement should be developed in a transparent and objective manner using a scoping exercise to identify which categories of land should be cleared to make Eritrea "impact free‟. Appeals for donor funding should be focussed on support for these more important areas. An exit strategy for donor funding can also be agreed based on the findings of this scoping study. 4. At the same time, it is appropriate to develop a more sustainable capacity with a size commensurate to the likely size of the residual contamination problem and the ability of the Government of Eritrea to fund it. 5. The existing strategic working group should be expanded to facilitate oversight and national ownership of the mine action program, as well as improving communication between stakeholders 6. The original use of a single project document for UNDP support was unwieldy. Separate project documents should be designed for the different elements of assistance, such as capacity development of the residual capacity, operational support to mine clearance in the mid term, and for victim support. Other project documents can be added as the need arises, and separate project documents can capture specific donor procedural needs. 7. Technical assistance should be focussed and time bound. Whilst there is agreement on the need for a single long-term strategic technical advisor, the provision of other technical assistance for specific capability gaps should be carefully designed using a training needs analysis process to ensure the assistance is demand driven and provides value for money. 8. There is a procedural need to compare the current national technical standards with IMAS to satisfy donor sensibilities about risk and liability. A common-sense, collaborative approach including suitable risk-management approaches should be able to accomplish this without a return to the past confrontations on this issue. 9. Donors will need access to an effective monitoring and evaluation process in order to provide them with a reasonable level of oversight on how their funds are being expended. This monitoring and evaluation process can be done on a periodic basis but the monitors will need the support of the government to allow them to access the work sites. 10. Early "buy-in‟ to this re-engagement process by Eritrean officials at the highest level will greatly improve stakeholder confidence and facilitate the development of appeals for new funding by the end of 2008.
Management Response: [Added: 2009/08/11]

Recommendations The recommendations made by the Evaluation Team in this report are presented in two parts: the first are responses to specific questions raised in the TOR; for ease of reference the original questions are set out below before each recommendation. The second part is a summary of general recommendations made by the Evaluation Team in this report. Relevance  Question: Considering the country context what needs to be done and/or changed to ensure continued relevance of mine action support within the country?  Recommendation: Mine action support should continue to support the settlement of IDP; other activities should focus on the clearance of highest priority agricultural land in the medium term.  Recommendation. An expanded strategic working group, including "customers‟ of mine action services such as the Ministry of Agriculture, will help improve the relevance of mine action in Eritrea and improve communications between stakehold

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