Operationalisation of the African peer review mechanism (APRM) in Mozambique

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2010-2011, Mozambique
Evaluation Type:
Final Project
Planned End Date:
06/2010
Completion Date:
09/2011
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
20,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document TORs Evaluation APRM FINAL.doc tor English 120.00 KB Posted 604
Download document Mozambique APRM Operationalization Final Evaluation Report.pdf report English 903.38 KB Posted 616
Title Operationalisation of the African peer review mechanism (APRM) in Mozambique
Atlas Project Number: 00052192
Evaluation Plan: 2010-2011, Mozambique
Evaluation Type: Final Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 09/2011
Planned End Date: 06/2010
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Democratic Governance
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017)
  • 1. Electoral laws, processes and institutions strengthen inclusive participation and professional electoral administration
Evaluation Budget(US $): 20,000
Source of Funding: 52192
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
José Jaime Macuane
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders: MPD, donors, National Forum
Countries: MOZAMBIQUE
Comments: Strategic Plan Areas - Democratic Governance; Partners - MPD;
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1 All project components that demand project funding should have a realistically plan of phasing out this modality of funding in favor of local sources up to 2014, be them either the state budget or any autonomous civil society mechanism. The phasing out should be negotiated and agreed upon among all the relevant stakeholders (civil society, government, parliament, judiciary and donors).
2 The project implementation modalities should follow the rationale of decentralization of funds, management based on organizations not individuals, and permanent mechanisms established at provincial and district level (focal points).
3 On the side of the civil society, the representation of the organizations and the participation should be through the thematic areas. The method of selection should also be more transparent, to avoid the criticism on the legitimacy of the representatives.
4 It is important to plan carefully each stage of the process and assure its consistency. Despite some weaknesses at certain stages, the architecture of the process has been designed to make the different steps complementary and with a potential to correct mistakes at specific points. Therefore, to ensure the final consistency, each component of the process, be it from the project point of view to create the capacities for the implementation of the APRM, or in the actual implementation of the process, must be seen in that perspective. This means that whilst the focus should be on the final results, it is crucial to know what insurmountable obstacles exist at each stage and how can be corrected with complementary measures along the implementation process.
5 On the design aspects, a future project should include strategies to mitigate the impact of resources constraints: time, budget and information. As thoroughly described, the country has carried out this first round of the APRM under severe time constraints and financial limitations. \
6 A situational analysis would also inform about the existing capacities, the capacity development needs, the present and potential constraints, the issues to take into account in engaging the various stakeholders and the resources needed to achieve the objectives defined for each stage.
7 Involving national stakeholders in the process of designing future projects, apart from meeting the participation criteria, can also ensure public awareness and consolidate the existing ownership of the APRM process. Involvement of national stakeholders at all levels, in the monitoring and evaluation of the National Programme of Action can clarify the intended and expected linkage between the APRM recommendations and the national plans and programmes, and, consequently, confirm the relevance of this exercise for the country and its citizens. With regards to monitoring, the project should support the creation and strengthening of a multi-layered structure mainstreamed within the existing participatory mechanisms, namely the development observatories and local councils, but with higher level of specialization and with enhanced capacities.
1. Recommendation: All project components that demand project funding should have a realistically plan of phasing out this modality of funding in favor of local sources up to 2014, be them either the state budget or any autonomous civil society mechanism. The phasing out should be negotiated and agreed upon among all the relevant stakeholders (civil society, government, parliament, judiciary and donors).
Management Response: [Added: 2014/04/09]

Noted. The CO will take this recommendation into consideration in its planning exercises.

Key Actions:

2. Recommendation: The project implementation modalities should follow the rationale of decentralization of funds, management based on organizations not individuals, and permanent mechanisms established at provincial and district level (focal points).
Management Response: [Added: 2014/04/09]

Noted. The CO will take this recommendation into consideration in its next projects.

Key Actions:

3. Recommendation: On the side of the civil society, the representation of the organizations and the participation should be through the thematic areas. The method of selection should also be more transparent, to avoid the criticism on the legitimacy of the representatives.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/04/09]

Noted. The CO will take this recommendation into consideration for its future interventions related to civil society.

Key Actions:

4. Recommendation: It is important to plan carefully each stage of the process and assure its consistency. Despite some weaknesses at certain stages, the architecture of the process has been designed to make the different steps complementary and with a potential to correct mistakes at specific points. Therefore, to ensure the final consistency, each component of the process, be it from the project point of view to create the capacities for the implementation of the APRM, or in the actual implementation of the process, must be seen in that perspective. This means that whilst the focus should be on the final results, it is crucial to know what insurmountable obstacles exist at each stage and how can be corrected with complementary measures along the implementation process.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/04/09]

Noted. The CO will take this recommendation into consideration in its future planning exercises.

Key Actions:

5. Recommendation: On the design aspects, a future project should include strategies to mitigate the impact of resources constraints: time, budget and information. As thoroughly described, the country has carried out this first round of the APRM under severe time constraints and financial limitations. \
Management Response: [Added: 2014/04/09]

Noted. The CO will take this recommendation into consideration in its planning exercises.

Key Actions:

6. Recommendation: A situational analysis would also inform about the existing capacities, the capacity development needs, the present and potential constraints, the issues to take into account in engaging the various stakeholders and the resources needed to achieve the objectives defined for each stage.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/04/09]

Noted. The CO will take this recommendation into consideration in its planning exercises.

Key Actions:

7. Recommendation: Involving national stakeholders in the process of designing future projects, apart from meeting the participation criteria, can also ensure public awareness and consolidate the existing ownership of the APRM process. Involvement of national stakeholders at all levels, in the monitoring and evaluation of the National Programme of Action can clarify the intended and expected linkage between the APRM recommendations and the national plans and programmes, and, consequently, confirm the relevance of this exercise for the country and its citizens. With regards to monitoring, the project should support the creation and strengthening of a multi-layered structure mainstreamed within the existing participatory mechanisms, namely the development observatories and local councils, but with higher level of specialization and with enhanced capacities.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/04/09]

Noted. The CO will take this recommendation into consideration in its planning exercises.

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