- Evaluation Plan:
- 2007-2011, Yemen
- Evaluation Type:
- Project
- Planned End Date:
- 09/2007
- Completion Date:
- 10/2007
- Status:
- Completed
- Management Response:
- Yes
- Evaluation Budget(US $):
- 30,000
Strengthening National Capacity in Human Rights
| Document | Type | Language | Size | Status | Downloads |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 TOR_HR_Evaluation_Strengthening_N_Capacity.doc |
tor | Posted | 761 | ||
| Evaluation__5_HR_Capacity_building.doc |
report | Posted | 847 |
| Title | Strengthening National Capacity in Human Rights | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atlas Project Number: | |||||||||
| Evaluation Plan: | 2007-2011, Yemen | ||||||||
| Evaluation Type: | Project | ||||||||
| Status: | Completed | ||||||||
| Completion Date: | 10/2007 | ||||||||
| Planned End Date: | 09/2007 | ||||||||
| Management Response: | Yes | ||||||||
| Focus Area: |
|
||||||||
| Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017) | |||||||||
| Evaluation Budget(US $): | 30,000 | ||||||||
| Source of Funding: | |||||||||
| Joint Programme: | No | ||||||||
| Joint Evaluation: | No | ||||||||
| Evaluation Team members: |
|
||||||||
| GEF Evaluation: | No | ||||||||
| Key Stakeholders: | |||||||||
| Countries: | YEMEN |
| Lessons | |
|---|---|
| Findings |
| Recommendations | |
|---|---|
| 1 | The main weaknesses of UNDP support relate to internal management (high staff turn over, team building and communication), qualitative M&E, pressures to deliver, gender-sensitive programming, and participatory processes with the main partner and other stakeholders. The combination of these factors incurred costs for sustainability and lack of sustainable national ownership. |
| 2 | No evidence reflecting a conflict-sensitive approach to human rights programming in UNDP-Yemen. |
| 3 | More attention should be given to economic and social rights. |
| 4 | CSOs included in capacity building efforts should be from rural areas. |
| 5 | There have been no revisions to the programme document or outputs and indicators. This leaves the project with results in some areas the project document had foreseen, but also with no results in some core areas. The lack of documentation of these strategic issues and decisions taken thereupon creates the impression that the project tended to be activity-driven ("do what works") during its first phase. Given the country context, this in principle appears to have been the right road to take. However, lack of access to (documented) participatory processes with the partner in which the project document, outputs and indicators were adjusted to the realities on the ground, incurred costs for lack of sustainability, and lack of national ownership. The lack of accessible documentation also is an opportunity lost to support access to information and use project documentation for lessons learned processes in the human rights sector. |
1. Recommendation: The main weaknesses of UNDP support relate to internal management (high staff turn over, team building and communication), qualitative M&E, pressures to deliver, gender-sensitive programming, and participatory processes with the main partner and other stakeholders. The combination of these factors incurred costs for sustainability and lack of sustainable national ownership.
Management Response: [Added: 2009/01/11]
While there might have been challenges in terms of the staffing of the Governance Team in the CO, these challenges are not the main cause for a perceived lack of sustainability and national ownership. The lack of national commitment, especially in terms budget allocations has resulted in a lack of sustainability. The related issues such as communication, M & E, gender sensitive programming will be taken on board in the new human rights project.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| In order to enhance national ownership of the next Human Rights project, UNDP CO has asked and succeeded in obtaining a financial contribution from the Government of Yemen to the new project. This will send a strong signal to the donor community in Yemen on the Government's commitment to the human rights agenda.
[Added: 2009/01/11] |
UNDP Governance Team/ MoHR | No due date | No deadline established |
2. Recommendation: No evidence reflecting a conflict-sensitive approach to human rights programming in UNDP-Yemen.
Management Response: [Added: 2009/01/11]
We agree that this is a shortcoming. Given the sensitivity of human rights programming and the increased social tension in Yemen, UNDP will pay special attention to conflict sensitive programming.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The CO will liaise with BCPR in order to explore means on how to build the capacity of the CO in conflict sensitive programming.
[Added: 2009/01/11] |
UNDP CO | No due date | No deadline established |
3. Recommendation: More attention should be given to economic and social rights.
Management Response: [Added: 2009/01/11]
We agree.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The civil society component of the next Human Rights project will focus on building the capacity of CSOs in analyzing local budgets and development plans from a human rights perspective
[Added: 2009/01/11] |
UNDP Governance Team/ MoHR | No due date | No deadline established |
4. Recommendation: CSOs included in capacity building efforts should be from rural areas.
Management Response: [Added: 2009/01/11]
We agree. NGOs located in the capital have benefited disproportionately from donor support, to the detriment of rural organizations that are more difficult to reach.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The next project will focus on CSOs operating outside the capital, and will seek synergies with other UNDP projects involved in CSO capacity building.
[Added: 2009/01/11] |
UNDP Governance Team | No due date | No deadline established |
5. Recommendation: There have been no revisions to the programme document or outputs and indicators. This leaves the project with results in some areas the project document had foreseen, but also with no results in some core areas. The lack of documentation of these strategic issues and decisions taken thereupon creates the impression that the project tended to be activity-driven ("do what works") during its first phase. Given the country context, this in principle appears to have been the right road to take. However, lack of access to (documented) participatory processes with the partner in which the project document, outputs and indicators were adjusted to the realities on the ground, incurred costs for lack of sustainability, and lack of national ownership. The lack of accessible documentation also is an opportunity lost to support access to information and use project documentation for lessons learned processes in the human rights sector.
Management Response: [Added: 2009/01/11]
We agree that there have been shortcomings in documenting the process of running the project. However, we do not agree that this has resulted in a lack of national ownership. While for UNDP national ownership of paramount importance, it is the national counterpart which should ensure that sustainability and ownership materializes via a more pro-active involvement in monitoring progress.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| During the past six months the UNDP-CO has devoted a substantial amount of time and resources to build the capacity of staff in RBM.
[Added: 2009/01/11] |
UNDP CO | 2011/12 | Completed |