Joint-final UNDAF Evaluation

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2012-2016, Suriname
Evaluation Type:
UNDAF
Planned End Date:
12/2015
Completion Date:
03/2015
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
45,000
Best Practices/Constraints and Lessons Learned At the mid-point in implementation some areas of the UNDAF need to be flagged so that adjustments can be made and/or promising practices can be promoted during the two years remaining. Policy Social protection: Key pieces of social protection legislation have been passed (National Health Insurance, Minimum Wage and Institutional Child Care) and allocations for Pensions and Child Support and have been increased. Programme Computer Aided Learning (CAL): The education sector?s computer aided learning (CAL) pilot project influenced government policy, and provided the IDB with a model to replicate and upscale for 18 schools. Also, the Ministry of Education has established an ICT Unit, and developed an ICT strategy paper. Data The Data PCG has made some good progress on collecting data for the publication of various reports (Household survey, MDG report, etc.). However, for the final two years the PCG should focus on making a link between data collection and the formulation of evidence-based policies, and overall sector planning. Management and Coordination The meeting of PSs prior to the JSC is an important addition to the UNDAF coordination structure as it provides an opportunity for government to exercise strong leadership and ownership by preparing a consolidated ?One Government? response. However, there is still a need for a forum to have high-level discussion among UN heads of agencies and government Final MTR Report on Suriname UNDAF 2012-2016 decision makers. PCGs have introduced a multi-sectoral, multidisciplinary approach into the programmes and ministries, and are creating a dialogue within and between ministries. To the extent possible, this collaboration should be extended beyond UN programmes as this dialogue can introduce a more integrated approach to the delivery of government services and transcend the traditional ?silo approach? practiced by sector ministries.

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document TOR_UNDAF MTR 2014 Suriname_Final_October 2014.pdf tor English 172.14 KB Posted 1126
Download document Final_UNDAF MTR_Report_March 2015.pdf report English 1120.75 KB Posted 1317
Download document Best Practices.pdf summary English 213.82 KB Posted 1107
Download document CV_Resume_Stuart Black.pdf related-document English 178.36 KB Posted 2433
Title Joint-final UNDAF Evaluation
Atlas Project Number:
Evaluation Plan: 2012-2016, Suriname
Evaluation Type: UNDAF
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 03/2015
Planned End Date: 12/2015
Management Response: Yes
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
Evaluation Budget(US $): 45,000
Source of Funding: UN RC Funds
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: Yes
  • Joint with UNDP, UNICEF, UNFPA, PAHO : WHO and non- resident agencies
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Nationality
Stuart Black Evaluation Consultant
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders: UN Agencies
Countries: SURINAME
Comments: Joint-final Evaluation postponed to 2016. Mid-term Evaluation completed in March 2015 and report uploaded
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1 Add a new output for ?Economic Diversification? (Output #11) in the programme level Outcome #1. The rationale for this is based on the fact that there is a need for an economic diversification/livelihood output at the level to boost the competitiveness of the informal sector, which at 20.8% is the largest contributor to GDP. In addition, this will complement Output #9 of the policy level Outcome #2 with substantive programme level input (however programming for Output #9 also needs to be completed: for example, the ILO Decent Work programme is missing).
2 There is an urgent need for ILO and the Government to develop a programme on Decent and Productive Work. Unemployment and especially youth unemployment is one of the major challenges facing development in Suriname. This should be programmed in Output #9 along with Trade Policy.
3 The output for Adolescents (Output #10) is very weak, with only two key actions identified. This should be developed into a full joint programme involving a number of relevant UN agencies combining a number ofinterventions into an ?integrated approach?, including Government priorities such as youth employment and empowerment, skills development, entrepreneurship, etc.
4 The Trade Policy output (#9) in the policy level Outcome (#2) needs to be programmed to meet the Government?s economic diversification goals. No key actions have been identified and the only entry is the UN agency (UNDP) and lead Government ministry namely the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
5 Output #7 of Outcome #2 (Enhancing national capacity for forestry management and forestry livelihoods in processing non-timber forest products) involves community level interventions (not policy), so it should be moved to Outcome #1 and placed under the new Economic Diversification output #11.
6 The new Economic Diversification Output #11 should be completed with a full range of key actions by various UN agencies, such as UNESCO's cultural heritage projects (tourism), FAO?s projects aimed at enhancing production and income generation, ILO?s youth employment, among others.
7 Some thought should be given to whether the REDD+ intervention has been placed in the most appropriate Output (#8, key action #4). Currently it is in the policy Outcome #2, but if the key actions are at the community level, it might be more appropriate to place it under programme Outcome #1 along with the other community-based environmental interventions in Output #8. Like most programs, REDD+ will respond to an overall policy goal (capacity strengthening of NGOs/civil society, human rights, etc.), but its placement in the UNDAP should be based on the direct results of the intervention, whether they will be felt at the community and NGO levels, or the policy level.
8 Outcome #3 (Data) has an implicit link between the collection of data and the need for evidence-based policies. However, the link to the policy Outcome #2 needs to be made more explicit in order to improve the focus of the data being collected and generated. Its key actions and targets should be revised to include links to evidence-based policy-making in the relevant ministries.
9 To improve the quality of results and targets of the data being collected in Output #2 of Outcome 3 (Improved national capacity for monitoring development outcomes), there is a need to introduce a system of project cycle management (PCM) centrally within the Planning Bureau of Suriname and throughout all government ministries, involving sector planning, PCM and RBM training. But more than mere capacity building, there is a need to institute a rigorous M&E system at the national and sector levels to monitor the sector plans, the government?s Development Plan, and the contribution of donor agency programmes (like the UNDAF) to national goals.
10 Within the UNDAF, the outcomes involve a combination of interventions in economic and social development and government policy making and capacity building. However, few NGOs have been included in the planning or implementation of UNDAF programs. This shortcoming needs to be addressed because NGOs and CBOs provide the sustainable aspects of social development at the community level, where government programmes do not always reach and are not always included in Suriname?s politicized coalition structure.
11 In addition to reporting on accomplishments, annual progress reports should also report on constraints, and the implication of those constraints for reaching the targets. Reports should provide input on the indicator progress, indicting what will not be achieved and why.
12 To improve Planning capacity of the Government, strengthening is needed at a number of levels: 1) developing sector plans in line ministries,2) establishing a M&E system in the Planning Bureau to enable the Government to monitor its Development Plan, and 3) establishing a cadre of technical M&E officers in each ministry.
13 The UN system should consider including NGOs and CBOs in the implementation of projects and programs, particularly in the interior so as to strengthen the sustainability of community based structures that support the marginalized groups closer to home.
14 In summary, a basic level of intervention logic needs to be introduced where for example the data level outputs of Outcome #3 explicitly support evidence-based policies being developed in Outcome #2; the programme level outputs of Outcome #1 need to focus on improving management and delivery of government services; and the policy level outputs of Outcome #2 need to build leadership at the senior levels of government.
15 The JSC meeting provides an opportunity for all agencies and national partners to interact and review their contributions to the achievement of national development goals relevant to the UNDAP. In order to revive the deliberation between Government and UN agencies, the MTR is recommending that the JSC re-establish itself as a forum for high-level discussion among government and UN decision makers to discuss priorities, bottlenecks and challenges, at least once in the annual cycle. The January JSC involves a presentation of the previous year?s progress, so the July JSC meeting could be used as a mid-year review to discuss implementation challenges and to take corrective action.
16 Recommendation: PCG members (both UN and government) should participate in a series of ?problem tree analysis? workshops, which will help to focus the PCGs to establish achievable targets and sustainable results. This will form part of a revamped M&E system
17 In addition, the MTR team has learned that no Outcome Working Groups (OWGs) have been established. OWGs may be more inclined to focus on the bottlenecks at the output level, where constraints are affecting achievement of the outcomes. For example, analysis of agency reports by outcome groups could provide an opportunity for UN agencies to collectively assess convergence of agency contributions and overall progress towards UNDAF outcomes, coordinated by the OWG chairs. Recommendation: Consideration should be given to the establishment of small, high-level Outcome Working Groups (OWGs) which might enhance the focus on constraints and bottlenecks at the output level that are affecting achievement of the outcomes.
18 Recommendation: The Government should consider consolidating the planning and coordination functions in the Planning Bureau. This would provide an opportunity for greater cooperation and coordination among donor agencies and with government, because the donor and sector coordination functions would be consolidated under one roof, which will improve the effectiveness and efficiency of donor support.
19 In examining options for future communication and coordination, it appears that the mechanisms and structures are appropriate (PCGs, JSC), but some fine-tuning is needed in the management of the dialogue, the selection of targets and the monitoring of results. In the area of government/UN dialogue, the JSC is the forum for important deliberations, and the UN agencies need to be involved in the discussion of those issues. At the level of PCGs, there is a need to re-focus on achievable targets with the help of problem tree analysis workshops. Finally, in the area of planning and monitoring, robust sector planning and M&E systems are needed to ensure a focus on the results targeted in the ministries? sector plans and the Development Plan.
20 Although the UN is playing a very supportive role in Suriname, the MTR has revealed that the global and regional programmes and approaches practiced by some UN agencies may need to be modified to suit the special circumstances of Suriname, which involve a dichotomy between MIC (Mid-Income country) and LIC (Low Income country), with weak Government capacity. This will have implications for coordination and management of the UN programme that may involve adjusting the tendency to provide short-term technical assistance in favour of longer-term experts. The UN system is very flexible and can tailor its programme to a range of countries in order to provide what the country needs. Because Suriname is considered an upper middle-income country, the new arrangements may have to include greater government cost-sharing for priority social programmes and more direct interventions in the interior involving civil society and NGOs.
21 Sector Planning and Project Cycle Management For this, PCGs need to come up with a set of revised targets that will be more realistic to achieve by 2016. In order to do this the PCGs will to need participate in ?problem tree analysis? sessions that will result in the identification of realistic indicators and achievable targets and results. It will require improved coordination and monitoring within the line ministries and centrally (Planning Bureau). This will involve two levels of support: a) Capacities need to be strengthened in line ministries through training in project cycle management, prioritizing, sector planning, budgeting, etc., and b) The Planning Bureau needs to establish a central planning and monitoring system that can track implementation of the Development Plan.
22 Youth/Adolescents The July 2014 JSC meeting made a recommendation to establish an Adolescents/Youth PCG. To facilitate this, the UN agencies could start by developing a ?joint strategy?, led by UNICEF and in collaboration with the Task Force. Following this, they could develop a joint programme to coordinate a joint response by the UN agencies and designed around the notion of supporting implementation of the results of the Task Force. As funding by the UN agencies may be problematic, such a programme could be funded by the government on a cost-sharing basis.1
23 Economic Diversification There are many opportunities that could be explored in the area of diversifying the economy away from mining by considering other opportunities associated with tourism, the environment, small business development, etc. Some agencies are already thinking about filling this gap. For example, FAO is in the early stages of programming a value chain development project involving particular commodities and incubators, etc. The project, which was agreed by ministers at a regional conference, is in the initial stages ofdevelopment. It is already in FAO?s strategic plan and is slotted to begin before 2016. UNESCO is adding some activities in cultural tourism, and UNDP is looking at the area of youth development through SIDS and SDGs. From the Government?s side there is a need for the various ministries to consolidate their thinking and come up with a number of areas that need support. For example, the Ministry of Labour needs to follow up on ILO?s decent work program. Also, there is a direct need for support in the area of entrepreneurship, particularly among youth, as the informal sector is the largest contributor to the GDP. This falls under the responsibility of the Ministry of Trade and Industry, which needs to signal the need for UN assistance for things like entrepreneurship training, small business development, and access to finance, etc. All of these areas could be folded into the new output #11.
24 Area based joint programmes This would involve developing a series of comprehensive ?area based? programmes in several geographical areas and incorporating a variety of relevant UN programmes including economic diversification, income generating projects, the environment (SGP), indigenous peoples? issues (e.g. climate change adaptation as their lives and agriculture are changing), health, social affairs, youth, etc. It would also involve managing support through NGOs and CBOs active in those areas. It would also have implications for data collection, as there is a lack of data due to the fact that the definition of administrative districts are not properly definedresulting in different data sets for health, census, education, social affairs, etc., all of which have different boundaries. It would also have implications for policy and planning by formulating recommendations on strategic sector plans and monitoring at the community and district levels. E.g. Moengo (where UNICEF is already active).
25 Civil society The UNDAF is designed to respond to national development priorities, and not only those developed by government in the Development Plan. The UNDAF formulation process involves incorporating other stakeholders including social partners, civil society and NGOs. However, while the UNDAF design process may have involved consultations with NGOs and civil society, for the most part these groups appear to have been left out of the implementation process. Planning and implementation of UN programmes is being done primarily by government and parastatals. By excluding NGOs, a viscous cycle develops where the capacity of NGOs is weakened, which provides justification for excluding them from funding in the future, so their capacity becomes even more constrained. In view of the fact that NGOs and CBOs have been neglected, the UN agencies should collaborate with and support civil society organizations directly. This will be particularly important in 2015 and 2016, when Government decision makers will be preoccupied with the elections. Supporting NGOs and CBOs is one way to ensure that self-sustainingcapacity is developed in rural communities. There are some ominous signs ahead ? for example because of years of neglect the national women?s network will likely disappear within a year. Such a ?civil society? programme could be developed in collaboration with the Ministry of Regional Development, but it should involve direct support for NGOs and CBOs
26 The next plan (2017-2021) should be developed out of the opportunities and shortcomings of the current UNDAF (2012-2016). In addition, the next plan could look at a fewer number of strategic areas: youth, environment, economic diversification, social protection, etc. using joint programmes instead of the current individual agency approach. This will involve improved programmatic coherence among UN agencies and government ministries. In order for the UN agencies to develop a more integrated UNDAF in Suriname, the absorptive capacity of the government would have to be improved. While currently the government may not be ready to develop such a programmatic approach, the capacity of the ministries could be elevated, and the leadership capabilities among the senior levels of government could be improved. The UN agencies will require more funding to develop a programmatic approach. This will be possible in some sectors, such as the environment, which has ample funding. The environment sector presents a strategic opportunity with the signing of the agreement for REDD+ and with considerable resources available for climate change. Nationally, environmental considerations permeate many aspects of life in Suriname, including land degradation from illegal mining practices, health, food security, safety, indigenous people?s issues, human rights, climate change impacts on agriculture, etc. So UNDP could develop a programmatic approach for the environment. But it will be important for the Government to finalize the implementation structures.
27 Suriname officially becoming a Delivering as One (DaO) country
1. Recommendation: Add a new output for ?Economic Diversification? (Output #11) in the programme level Outcome #1. The rationale for this is based on the fact that there is a need for an economic diversification/livelihood output at the level to boost the competitiveness of the informal sector, which at 20.8% is the largest contributor to GDP. In addition, this will complement Output #9 of the policy level Outcome #2 with substantive programme level input (however programming for Output #9 also needs to be completed: for example, the ILO Decent Work programme is missing).
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Partially agree. Developing a new Output on Economic Diversification will not be feasible under the current UNDAF; the UN agencies do not have the capacity to fully provide technical assistance to this output. However, there are some components of Economic Diversification that can be considered such as Livelihood and Youth employment. For example the Ministry of Sports & Youth Affairs has requested support in the area of Youth employment and the UN has not yet been able to cater to this request.

Key Actions:

2. Recommendation: There is an urgent need for ILO and the Government to develop a programme on Decent and Productive Work. Unemployment and especially youth unemployment is one of the major challenges facing development in Suriname. This should be programmed in Output #9 along with Trade Policy.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Agree. On 5 January 2015, the Ministry of Labour and the ILO have signed the Decent Work Country Programme 2014 -2016. The Programme interventions have been linked to the 3 Outcomes of the UNDAF 2012-2016. Notes: UNICEF may be in cooperation with ILO on 1) policy for maternal leave. 2) Adolescent programme. Also explore the possibilities through other UN agencies such as FAO. Considerations should be given to link work with youth more specifically to the job market; UN agencies can analyze job market and training needs for youth and relate the programmes to those training needs. Please note also the recommendations of the National Workshop on Occupational Health supported by PAHO (2011) and follow up (2012). Explicit attention for informal sector workers AND improvement essential preconditions for healthy ageing in formal work (ie prevention NCD?s, cancer).

Key Actions:

3. Recommendation: The output for Adolescents (Output #10) is very weak, with only two key actions identified. This should be developed into a full joint programme involving a number of relevant UN agencies combining a number ofinterventions into an ?integrated approach?, including Government priorities such as youth employment and empowerment, skills development, entrepreneurship, etc.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Partially agree. A full joint programme for Youth may not be feasible under the current UNDAF and could be recommended for the next UNDAF.Propose to reinforce the joint actions of the UN agencies aiming at Adolescents/Youth and reinforce the strengths of the UN agencies? support. In the July 2014 JSC, the establishment of a PCG Adolescents was recommended. The follow up on the establishment needs to take place. The Adolescents/Youth PCG would have to lead to more coordination and integration in the area of Adolescents programming. Note: although only 2 targets have been identified under Output #10 Adolescents, there are targets under other Outputs that have an effect on Youth/Adolescents. Notes: Ministry of Education and UNESCO are working together on a skills development programme for Youth. A joint ILO-UNESCO initiative on Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) and Skills policy development and capacity building in youth entrepreneurship in Suriname has been initiated in 2014. Over the 2015-2016 period this will result in the finalization of a national TVET policy, the establishment of the Suriname National Training Council to coordinate all skills training and certification in the country. The priority programme of government: NCD?s - supported by PAHO and UN ? explicitly focused on prevention of premature morbidity (ie obesity) and premature mortality (healthy ageing). Safe Motherhood and Neonatal Health Action plan; focuses on adolescent and youth. Stichting Trainings projekten is an NGO that is enhancing training and income generation of disabled youth. Identified for donation of wheelchairs (Int. Wheelchair foundation) and for training in maintenance (sustainability). Developing a joint programme for work with Adolescents/Youth would be great, and could be linked with recommendation 2.

Key Actions:

4. Recommendation: The Trade Policy output (#9) in the policy level Outcome (#2) needs to be programmed to meet the Government?s economic diversification goals. No key actions have been identified and the only entry is the UN agency (UNDP) and lead Government ministry namely the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Request clarification from the consultant on this recommendation. However, given the areas that the UN agencies can provide support in, it may not be feasible for the UN to support in Trade policy. This is an area for other development partners. The UN can be relevant in the aid coordination discussion. Note: in Jamaica the UNDP was a partner in the economic restructuring process which was a process supported by different development partners.

Key Actions:

5. Recommendation: Output #7 of Outcome #2 (Enhancing national capacity for forestry management and forestry livelihoods in processing non-timber forest products) involves community level interventions (not policy), so it should be moved to Outcome #1 and placed under the new Economic Diversification output #11.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

FAO to provide inputs on this recommendation

Key Actions:

6. Recommendation: The new Economic Diversification Output #11 should be completed with a full range of key actions by various UN agencies, such as UNESCO's cultural heritage projects (tourism), FAO?s projects aimed at enhancing production and income generation, ILO?s youth employment, among others.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Partially agree. Developing a new Output on Economic Diversification will not be feasible under the current UNDAF; the UN agencies do not have the capacity to fully provide technical assistance to this output. However, there are some components of Economic Diversification that can be considered such as Livelihood and Youth employment. Notes: the key actions of the UN agencies that have been referred to could be placed under existing Outputs that are best related to the key actions. For example Youth employment was earlier (recommendation 2) recommended under Output #9. We need to carefully look at both Output #9 and the new proposed Output #11 to avoid overlap, and make sure that they are complementary.

Key Actions:

7. Recommendation: Some thought should be given to whether the REDD+ intervention has been placed in the most appropriate Output (#8, key action #4). Currently it is in the policy Outcome #2, but if the key actions are at the community level, it might be more appropriate to place it under programme Outcome #1 along with the other community-based environmental interventions in Output #8. Like most programs, REDD+ will respond to an overall policy goal (capacity strengthening of NGOs/civil society, human rights, etc.), but its placement in the UNDAP should be based on the direct results of the intervention, whether they will be felt at the community and NGO levels, or the policy level.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Disagree. REDD+ is a policy output; some actions in the preparatory phase regard community level actions and community participation. However it is primarily a policy level intervention

Key Actions:

8. Recommendation: Outcome #3 (Data) has an implicit link between the collection of data and the need for evidence-based policies. However, the link to the policy Outcome #2 needs to be made more explicit in order to improve the focus of the data being collected and generated. Its key actions and targets should be revised to include links to evidence-based policy-making in the relevant ministries.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Agree. Emphasis not only on data collection and data dissemination but more focus on interpretation, analysis and the use of data in evidence based policy development. Although it should not be underestimated that some sectors still need support in process of data collection; the quality of raw data, distinction between qualitative and quantative data. The PCG Data has identified this gap in interpretation, analysis and use of data and will focus on strengthening the capacity of the actors as of 2015. The General Bureau of Statistics (GBS) should take the overall responsibility. Also sharing of what is done through the UN agencies should be enhanced. Notes: the UN already supports strengthening of data systems in for example the health and education sector. Another area of support/advocacy could be to support the Government in establishing a baseline related to the new social security policy that the Government has recently implemented. The UN can advocate on how to set up a baseline and how to monitor/evaluate the impact for these policies for the target groups. Consideration should also be given to - Support the ABS on the national strategy on development forstatistics (refer to NSDS ? National Strategy for Development of Statistics in Suriname that was developed in 2009 led by GBS that could be updated) - Capacity assessment of the current statistics in government ministries. - DevInfo training including analyzing data and interpretation of data. - Capacity development of pre-service statisticians, through University of Suriname. - Actively support/encourage line ministries to consider policy development and the specific needs on data and evidence. - Collection, linkage, interpretation and use of data. Data may be available ie on determinants of health in other sectors and need to be linked to data on health effects (morbidity, mortality) to enhance relevant multisectoral action.

Key Actions:

9. Recommendation: To improve the quality of results and targets of the data being collected in Output #2 of Outcome 3 (Improved national capacity for monitoring development outcomes), there is a need to introduce a system of project cycle management (PCM) centrally within the Planning Bureau of Suriname and throughout all government ministries, involving sector planning, PCM and RBM training. But more than mere capacity building, there is a need to institute a rigorous M&E system at the national and sector levels to monitor the sector plans, the government?s Development Plan, and the contribution of donor agency programmes (like the UNDAF) to national goals.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Agree. However distinction should be made in which process can be continued with the current coordination mechanism (PCGs) and what should be done in the process towards development of the new UNDAF, which is related to the Government?s view on central planning and utilizing the structure of the Planning bureau. Government will have to lead in structuring and strengthening central planning. Emphasis on basic knowledge to applying the knowledge. Immediate action is that the UN can continue supporting the current structure of the UNDAF focal points and strengthen their capacity in effective project planning; all related the UNDAF implementation. For example continue RBM exercising training. Notes: - Capacity building relates also to HRBA integration in program planning and monitoring and how to support Government to report on key treaties.- RBM training as implemented with representatives of different sectors proved relevant to enhance multi-sectoral cooperation.

Key Actions:

10. Recommendation: Within the UNDAF, the outcomes involve a combination of interventions in economic and social development and government policy making and capacity building. However, few NGOs have been included in the planning or implementation of UNDAF programs. This shortcoming needs to be addressed because NGOs and CBOs provide the sustainable aspects of social development at the community level, where government programmes do not always reach and are not always included in Suriname?s politicized coalition structure.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Agree. Currently NGOs are involved in the implementation; the Ministries take the lead in involving the NGOs and ask the NGOs to execute the project. The good partnership between the NGOs and Govt should be encouraged. UNDAF coordination mechanism: it would be beneficial for the project execution to have NGOs involved; however the Government overall approval is needed. Considerations: - how to engage NGOs in a substantive manner; given the limited funds available because of the Suriname middle income status. UNICEF is applying the equity focused programming ? provide a pilot to serve as an example/best practice and then do national expansion. - Propose a joint assessment of the NGOs capacity towards preparing for the new UNDAF. this is not something the UN can take up; the Government should take the lead in this and the UN can support. - Suggestion is to integrate the NGO capacity assessment to the Common Country assessment. For example looking at the different roles of civil society, e.g. on advocacy of issues such as human rights.

Key Actions:

11. Recommendation: In addition to reporting on accomplishments, annual progress reports should also report on constraints, and the implication of those constraints for reaching the targets. Reports should provide input on the indicator progress, indicting what will not be achieved and why.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Agree. The constraints are reported during the Joint Steering Committee meetings; however not all constraints are effectively dealt with. Propose to have specific issues identified for the JSC and that these are thoroughly discussed in the JSC to find solutions.

Key Actions:

12. Recommendation: To improve Planning capacity of the Government, strengthening is needed at a number of levels: 1) developing sector plans in line ministries,2) establishing a M&E system in the Planning Bureau to enable the Government to monitor its Development Plan, and 3) establishing a cadre of technical M&E officers in each ministry.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Ref MTR recommendation # 9. The UN can support the Government with the planning if there is a specific request. For the next National planning/UNDAF cycle ?determine what the Government wants as support in the planning process. There should be a dialogue with the stakeholders/partners on the need for developing sector plans. The UN could advocate for the link between the National Development plan and the sector plans; encourage the Government to have a clear strategy per sector that inherent to the National Development plan. M&E: continue bottom up approach through continuation of RBM exercising training and problem tree analysis

Key Actions:

13. Recommendation: The UN system should consider including NGOs and CBOs in the implementation of projects and programs, particularly in the interior so as to strengthen the sustainability of community based structures that support the marginalized groups closer to home.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Ref MTR recommendation # 10.

Key Actions:

14. Recommendation: In summary, a basic level of intervention logic needs to be introduced where for example the data level outputs of Outcome #3 explicitly support evidence-based policies being developed in Outcome #2; the programme level outputs of Outcome #1 need to focus on improving management and delivery of government services; and the policy level outputs of Outcome #2 need to build leadership at the senior levels of government.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Agree. The challenge lies in the strategy to explain the intervention logic to the senior management. Perhaps master class sessions with international technical experts could be a strategy.

Key Actions:

15. Recommendation: The JSC meeting provides an opportunity for all agencies and national partners to interact and review their contributions to the achievement of national development goals relevant to the UNDAP. In order to revive the deliberation between Government and UN agencies, the MTR is recommending that the JSC re-establish itself as a forum for high-level discussion among government and UN decision makers to discuss priorities, bottlenecks and challenges, at least once in the annual cycle. The January JSC involves a presentation of the previous year?s progress, so the July JSC meeting could be used as a mid-year review to discuss implementation challenges and to take corrective action.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Agree. How do we re-establish? The PS? need to be in the room with the UN and have some specific topics on the agenda in order to have a structured debate. Strengthening of UN?s leadership is one aspect. But also the leadership of the PS of MoFA that the PS? attend the JSC and commit to the debate. What can the UN; how does the UN help in facilitating the setting of the priorities and how to address and identify common issues. Better agenda planning is an option to have a structured and strategic debate.

Key Actions:

16. Recommendation: Recommendation: PCG members (both UN and government) should participate in a series of ?problem tree analysis? workshops, which will help to focus the PCGs to establish achievable targets and sustainable results. This will form part of a revamped M&E system
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Agree. Relate to RBM training ? use the mechanism of problem tree analysis in the different sectors or for different themes. Look in the PCGs on what issues/themes could be addressed through the mechanism of problem tree analysis.

Key Actions:

17. Recommendation: In addition, the MTR team has learned that no Outcome Working Groups (OWGs) have been established. OWGs may be more inclined to focus on the bottlenecks at the output level, where constraints are affecting achievement of the outcomes. For example, analysis of agency reports by outcome groups could provide an opportunity for UN agencies to collectively assess convergence of agency contributions and overall progress towards UNDAF outcomes, coordinated by the OWG chairs. Recommendation: Consideration should be given to the establishment of small, high-level Outcome Working Groups (OWGs) which might enhance the focus on constraints and bottlenecks at the output level that are affecting achievement of the outcomes.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Partially agree. The recognition should be given to the need for in-depth Outcome level discussions. However creating a new layer in the coordination mechanism is not recommended but focus on strengthening current M&E structure/PCG structure. Proposals: - Strengthen the M&E system and restructuring of the PCGs to be able to do Output/Outcome analysis and discussion; - Have the debate on the Outcomes within the UN and then work with the Government counterparts and prepare for the JSC to have a more concise discussion and decision taking.

Key Actions:

18. Recommendation: Recommendation: The Government should consider consolidating the planning and coordination functions in the Planning Bureau. This would provide an opportunity for greater cooperation and coordination among donor agencies and with government, because the donor and sector coordination functions would be consolidated under one roof, which will improve the effectiveness and efficiency of donor support.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Even though this is a recommendation out of the scope of the MTR, it is relevant. Proposed that this recommendation is rewritten.

Key Actions:

19. Recommendation: In examining options for future communication and coordination, it appears that the mechanisms and structures are appropriate (PCGs, JSC), but some fine-tuning is needed in the management of the dialogue, the selection of targets and the monitoring of results. In the area of government/UN dialogue, the JSC is the forum for important deliberations, and the UN agencies need to be involved in the discussion of those issues. At the level of PCGs, there is a need to re-focus on achievable targets with the help of problem tree analysis workshops. Finally, in the area of planning and monitoring, robust sector planning and M&E systems are needed to ensure a focus on the results targeted in the ministries? sector plans and the Development Plan.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Agree with observation. Notes: Government and UN to reach agreement on the problem tree analysis workshops. Government to decide on way forward with robust sector planning.

Key Actions:

20. Recommendation: Although the UN is playing a very supportive role in Suriname, the MTR has revealed that the global and regional programmes and approaches practiced by some UN agencies may need to be modified to suit the special circumstances of Suriname, which involve a dichotomy between MIC (Mid-Income country) and LIC (Low Income country), with weak Government capacity. This will have implications for coordination and management of the UN programme that may involve adjusting the tendency to provide short-term technical assistance in favour of longer-term experts. The UN system is very flexible and can tailor its programme to a range of countries in order to provide what the country needs. Because Suriname is considered an upper middle-income country, the new arrangements may have to include greater government cost-sharing for priority social programmes and more direct interventions in the interior involving civil society and NGOs.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Agree with observation. Regarding involvement of civil society/NGOs, proposal is to have a capacity assessment done among the NGOs as part of the Common Country Assessment. Note: the idea to organize a MIC workshop in Suriname with a broad participation of stakeholders is still valid.

Key Actions:

21. Recommendation: Sector Planning and Project Cycle Management For this, PCGs need to come up with a set of revised targets that will be more realistic to achieve by 2016. In order to do this the PCGs will to need participate in ?problem tree analysis? sessions that will result in the identification of realistic indicators and achievable targets and results. It will require improved coordination and monitoring within the line ministries and centrally (Planning Bureau). This will involve two levels of support: a) Capacities need to be strengthened in line ministries through training in project cycle management, prioritizing, sector planning, budgeting, etc., and b) The Planning Bureau needs to establish a central planning and monitoring system that can track implementation of the Development Plan.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Ref recommendation # 9 and recommendation # 12.

Key Actions:

22. Recommendation: Youth/Adolescents The July 2014 JSC meeting made a recommendation to establish an Adolescents/Youth PCG. To facilitate this, the UN agencies could start by developing a ?joint strategy?, led by UNICEF and in collaboration with the Task Force. Following this, they could develop a joint programme to coordinate a joint response by the UN agencies and designed around the notion of supporting implementation of the results of the Task Force. As funding by the UN agencies may be problematic, such a programme could be funded by the government on a cost-sharing basis.1
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

The current national Adolescent/Youth policy framework is led by the Presidential Task Force. This is not a structural approach. A full joint programme for Youth may not be feasible under the current UNDAF and could be recommended for the next UNDAF. Propose to reinforce the joint actions of the UN agencies aiming at Adolescents/Youth and reinforce the strengths of the UN agencies? support. In the July 2014 JSC, the establishment of a PCG Adolescents was recommended. The follow up on the establishment needs to take place. The Adolescents/Youth PCG would have to lead to more coordination and integration in the area of Adolescents programming. The PCG Adolescents/Youth should be led by the ministry of Sports and Youth (MoSY). The idea is to establish a coordinating team in the MoSY and the transition of this team in the organizational structure of the Ministry. BUT STRENGTHENING IS VERY MUCH NEEDED. Important condition is that the

Key Actions:

23. Recommendation: Economic Diversification There are many opportunities that could be explored in the area of diversifying the economy away from mining by considering other opportunities associated with tourism, the environment, small business development, etc. Some agencies are already thinking about filling this gap. For example, FAO is in the early stages of programming a value chain development project involving particular commodities and incubators, etc. The project, which was agreed by ministers at a regional conference, is in the initial stages ofdevelopment. It is already in FAO?s strategic plan and is slotted to begin before 2016. UNESCO is adding some activities in cultural tourism, and UNDP is looking at the area of youth development through SIDS and SDGs. From the Government?s side there is a need for the various ministries to consolidate their thinking and come up with a number of areas that need support. For example, the Ministry of Labour needs to follow up on ILO?s decent work program. Also, there is a direct need for support in the area of entrepreneurship, particularly among youth, as the informal sector is the largest contributor to the GDP. This falls under the responsibility of the Ministry of Trade and Industry, which needs to signal the need for UN assistance for things like entrepreneurship training, small business development, and access to finance, etc. All of these areas could be folded into the new output #11.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

One aspect to be considered is Youth employment, which is very emerging. How does the UN address this? Government has asked strengthening for entrepreneurs? development among Youth. UNESCO is supporting the TVET policy development. A technical committee under the Vice-President?s office is leading; this committee has a broad stakeholders? representation. Is the ILO connected to this? Yes the ILO is connected.Canada/CIDA has a 10 million project to support skills training and TVET. Will there be more than policy development? A national training council for Suriname will be set up. UNESCO and ILO will work on this. Clarification on the reference to cultural tourism: UNESCO?s support to the development of comprehensive culture policies for the sustainable management and use of intangible heritage will provide the framework for, inter alia, the development of cultural industries with income generating potential How to link this initiative to the Adolescents programme? How to make the link from training to employment. The strong working relationship of the UN with the PADF should be maintained. ILO?s regional programme is also on entrepreneurship. Some components: - Youth employment - Sustainable livelihoods Building blocks towards youth employment are TVET and skills development. But the actual employment of youth is another issue. E.g. Trinidad OJT programme could be an example for Suriname on how to connect to youth employment.

Key Actions:

24. Recommendation: Area based joint programmes This would involve developing a series of comprehensive ?area based? programmes in several geographical areas and incorporating a variety of relevant UN programmes including economic diversification, income generating projects, the environment (SGP), indigenous peoples? issues (e.g. climate change adaptation as their lives and agriculture are changing), health, social affairs, youth, etc. It would also involve managing support through NGOs and CBOs active in those areas. It would also have implications for data collection, as there is a lack of data due to the fact that the definition of administrative districts are not properly definedresulting in different data sets for health, census, education, social affairs, etc., all of which have different boundaries. It would also have implications for policy and planning by formulating recommendations on strategic sector plans and monitoring at the community and district levels. E.g. Moengo (where UNICEF is already active).
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

For Suriname to consider: - PAHO Guyana shield programme (Guyana, French Guyana, Brazil, Suriname) could be the link with a programme on border health (triangular and south ? south cooperation should be enhanced): France, US, Brazil are willing to support the UN in border health issues. - UNDP Guyana shield programme looks at the eco-system ? link to a programme on border health should be explored. - Have to go beyond borders e.g. through the Medical Mission- UNICEF ? look at WASH as part of the programme on border health - The area of Guyaba (UNFPA, UNICEF, PAHO) could be further explored. Look at e.g. WASH and Nutrition. And consider fund raising for the Enfant du Monde initiative. - Immunization could also be considered in the border health programme - Other areas to consider for border health programme are Sexual Reproductive Health, Maternal and Infant Health, Family planning (UNFPA can bring technical expertise) - Resource mobilization strategy could be developed - Suricorps link can also be explored - The little local capacity should be considered when planning the interventions - Exploring the relationship with ministry of Regional Development

Key Actions:

25. Recommendation: Civil society The UNDAF is designed to respond to national development priorities, and not only those developed by government in the Development Plan. The UNDAF formulation process involves incorporating other stakeholders including social partners, civil society and NGOs. However, while the UNDAF design process may have involved consultations with NGOs and civil society, for the most part these groups appear to have been left out of the implementation process. Planning and implementation of UN programmes is being done primarily by government and parastatals. By excluding NGOs, a viscous cycle develops where the capacity of NGOs is weakened, which provides justification for excluding them from funding in the future, so their capacity becomes even more constrained. In view of the fact that NGOs and CBOs have been neglected, the UN agencies should collaborate with and support civil society organizations directly. This will be particularly important in 2015 and 2016, when Government decision makers will be preoccupied with the elections. Supporting NGOs and CBOs is one way to ensure that self-sustainingcapacity is developed in rural communities. There are some ominous signs ahead ? for example because of years of neglect the national women?s network will likely disappear within a year. Such a ?civil society? programme could be developed in collaboration with the Ministry of Regional Development, but it should involve direct support for NGOs and CBOs
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Ref recommendation # 9 and recommendation # 12.

Key Actions:

26. Recommendation: The next plan (2017-2021) should be developed out of the opportunities and shortcomings of the current UNDAF (2012-2016). In addition, the next plan could look at a fewer number of strategic areas: youth, environment, economic diversification, social protection, etc. using joint programmes instead of the current individual agency approach. This will involve improved programmatic coherence among UN agencies and government ministries. In order for the UN agencies to develop a more integrated UNDAF in Suriname, the absorptive capacity of the government would have to be improved. While currently the government may not be ready to develop such a programmatic approach, the capacity of the ministries could be elevated, and the leadership capabilities among the senior levels of government could be improved. The UN agencies will require more funding to develop a programmatic approach. This will be possible in some sectors, such as the environment, which has ample funding. The environment sector presents a strategic opportunity with the signing of the agreement for REDD+ and with considerable resources available for climate change. Nationally, environmental considerations permeate many aspects of life in Suriname, including land degradation from illegal mining practices, health, food security, safety, indigenous people?s issues, human rights, climate change impacts on agriculture, etc. So UNDP could develop a programmatic approach for the environment. But it will be important for the Government to finalize the implementation structures.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Considerations by the UNCT - Key Health issues to be identified; - Key Education issues to be identified - Identify strategic areas in relation to the SDGs - Relate UNDAF priorities to the national planning process and the priorities identified through that process (UN can also influence the identification of priorities; based on lessons learned and best practice of the current UNDAF implementation) - The DaO principles to be implemented based on an incremental approach; Suriname already has major steps in joint programming - Have joint programmes for the next UNDAF is a must ? related to DaO ? relate to the fund raising issues in the country ? relate donor ? resource mobilization - Who is our target for resource mobilization? Have One Voice to advocate for the resource mobilization ? Guyana shield programme is an opportunity/US and Brazil /France/Dutch new diplomatic relationship with Suriname/IDB Joint programme issues: - SDGs awareness - Adolescents/Youth - Border health - Approaches joint programmes: - Design a joint programme on the current core resources ? what is our common interest? - Resource mobilization ? prepare project documents and have the donor community based on the idea we have agreed upon- Already developed ideas: Suricorps/Guyana shield programme/ MICS/Health/Adolescent e.g. adolescent pregnancy Proposals: - Each agency can identify 1 idea and start preparing - UN agencies should continue the internal discussions on Data/Youth/Health - sit together for the planning and engagement with the Government - Donor meetings continued with the embassies and have the reporting to the UNCT - UNICEF do the MICS and if the agencies can support Relevance of the MTR (take away of UN agencies) - Provided an opportunity to engage with the ministries; shows level of commitment - Reinforce/Strengthen the DaO approach - Shaping for the next UNDAF - Actual impact on human and social development is still pending - Develop a roadmap on continuing implementing the DaO - For UNESCO it gives an opportunity to work with the partner agencies and strengthen the joint activities

Key Actions:

27. Recommendation: Suriname officially becoming a Delivering as One (DaO) country
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/30]

Suriname is a self-starter since 2006; Discuss with the Government on formalizing the DaO status and if agreed, set out a roadmap for the process to make the status official.

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