- Evaluation Plan:
- 2009-2013, Independent Evaluation Office
- Evaluation Type:
- Planned End Date:
- Completion Date:
- Management Response:
- Evaluation Budget(US $):
Evaluation of UNDP Support to Conflict-Affected Countries i the Context of UN Peace Operations
|Evaluation of UNDP support to conflict affected countries.pdf||report||English||1465.29 KB||Posted||995|
|Executive-Summary- Evaluation of UNDP support to conflict affected countries_2013.pdf||summary||English||536.40 KB||Posted||599|
|Title||Evaluation of UNDP Support to Conflict-Affected Countries i the Context of UN Peace Operations|
|Atlas Project Number:|
|Evaluation Plan:||2009-2013, Independent Evaluation Office|
|Planned End Date:||01/2013|
|Corporate Outcomes (UNDP Strategic Plan 2008-20013)|
|Evaluation Budget(US $):||250,000|
|Source of Funding:|
|Evaluation Team members:||
|1||Recommendation 1. UNDP should significantly enhance the quality and use of conflict analysis at the country level, including guidance and standard operating procedures detailing when and how analyses should be developed and periodically updated. Effective analyses of needs and risks should, crucially, lead to a theory of change for the planned UNDP support, and then directly to a sequence of activities and a means of measuring progress against objectives.|
|2||Recommendation 2. UNDP should make greater efforts to translate corporate management cooperation between UNDP, DPKO and DPA to the specifics of country priorities and the sequencing of interventions. This would imply a more central role for UNDP in the planning stages at the beginning of integrated missions and then through the transition from peacekeeping to peacebuilding and in the drawdown of an integrated mission. Clear corporate guidelines and criteria need to be developed in this regard.|
|3||Recommendation 3. UNDP should be unambiguous in establishing what recovery projects are eligible for inclusion in a Consolidated Appeal Process or its equivalent. UNDP should make better use of situation teams that convene quickly during the outbreak of conflicts.|
|4||Recommendation 4. Greater attention should be given to institutional arrangements in order to more effectively manage and disseminate knowledge on pooled multi-donor trust funds at the corporate level ? and how this can serve country offices requested to manage such funds.|
|5||Recommendation 5. To reinforce the importance of ?delivering as one? in post-conflict settings, the UNDP/UNFPA/UNOPS Executive Board should raise with the United Nations Secretariat and Security Council, for their consideration, the importance of establishing clear guidance on the division of labour and resources during the drawdown of integrated missions. This would help to ensure that individual organizations such as UNDP are adequately prepared for their enhanced role during transition and post-transition.|
|6||Recommendation 6. Cooperation with international financial institutions, including the World Bank, should be further developed in the areas of joint approaches to post-crisis needs assessments and crisis prevention planning.|
|7||Recommendation 7. UNDP should establish an internal human resources programme designed to prepare and place female staff in conflict settings and should set tighter benchmarks for offices to meet gender targets.|
|8||Recommendation 8. All programming for conflict-affected countries should articulate a clear exit strategy. Direct implementation projects should be required to justify why they cannot be nationally executed and should include capacity development measures and a time frame for transitioning to national implementation modalities.|
|9||Recommendation 9. UNDP should expand its staff training programmes for countries identified as at risk for conflict, revise hiring procedures for staff to stress experience in conflict settings and provide additional incentives for experienced staff to continue working in conflict-affected hardship posts.|
|10||Recommendation 10. UNDP should establish new guidance for project development in crisisaffected countries, including generic sets of benchmarks and indicators. This should also include monitoring, evaluation and reporting on progress in conflict settings. These tools should build from programme indicators developed in non-conflict contexts and then be revised to reflect changed circumstances brought on by conflict.|
UNDP country offices and regions have over the last decade developed various tailor-made approaches (such as the Political Analysis and Prospective Scenarios Project in Latin America (PAPEP)), to endow UNDP with a stronger capacity for conflict analysis and conflict mitigation strategies/initiatives. In order to further strengthen these capacities, UNDP has over the past few years supported country offices by deploying Peace and Development Advisers (PDAs) within UNDP offices and/or United Nations country teams to provide analytical expertise and advice to the offices of the United Nations Resident Coordinator. However, UNDP recognizes that this has not been sufficient to address the challenge raised in the recommendation. As such, UNDP has already initiated a review of the Conflict-related Development Analysis (CDA) tool and methodology, which is designed to support improved contextual and conflict analyses by UNDP country offices. The exercise will also include revisiting the standard terms of reference and profile for PDAs to strengthen analytical capacity for prevention. The exercise is led by the Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery (BCPR) and is to be finalized by December 2012. Starting in January 2013, a comprehensive rollout plan to train UNDP programme staff in the use of the CDA tool will be initiated, beginning in UNDP priority countries. UNDP is also committed to reviewing the various approaches that have been developed by its various units to better inform a corporate strategy in this regard and to strengthen the relevance and the quality of the CDA tool. Importantly, UNDP has also begun to work on the development and establishment of an Early Warning and Early Action corporate system, which should be operational by March 2013. The aim of the system is to ensure that UNDP better detects possible crises before they erupt and has an effective mechanism to respond adequately and coherently in a preventive manner to safeguard development gains and avoid possible strife.
|1.1 Finalize the update of CDA tool, including review of other approaches that exist in UNDP||BCPR, Regional Bureaux, Bureau for Development Policy (BDP)||2013/07||Completed||The revision of the new CDA tool was finalized in June 2013. The CDA roll-out was launched in July 2013, with training-of-trainers workshop for 30 UNDP practitioners.|
|1.2 Conduct formal training on conflict analysis across UNDP programme staff, starting with staff in CPR priority countries||BCPR||2013/12||Completed||The CDA trainers have delivered training for the priority country offices in Africa (Sept. 2013), and Asia (Oct 2013) regions.|
|1.3 Review additional support to ensure the effective implementation of the CDA tool||BCPR, Regional Bureaux, BDP||2013/12||Completed|
|1.4 Identify two countries per region to undertake a systematic conflict analysis and put in place the capacities to periodically update the analysis. Monitor the usage of the analysis for UNDP programming||BCPR, Regional Bureaux (in consultation with the Department of Political Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat [DPA])||2013/12||Completed||The new CDA tool was applied in selected priority countries (Myanmar, Yemen, Afghanistan). The BCPR and RBs? country focal points ensure use of the analyses? findings in programmes? design.|
|1.5 Develop and establish an Early Warning/Early Action system||BCPR, Regional Bureaux||2013/12||Completed|
In February 2011, UNDP established the Executive Team (chaired by the Associate Administrator)to better address protracted crises and complex emergencies. The Executive Team is a forum for UNDP Senior Management to provide clearer guidance to Bureaux and country offices in all mission planning stages and promotes a common position for senior-level coordination with other United Nations partners. The new United Nations system-wide policy on transitions, currently being developed for mission contexts, and the revision of the IMPP guidelines, which involves the participation of UNDP, will further reinforce institutional relations between UNDP, DPKO and DPA. In parallel and to complement this exercise, UNDP is also drafting a lessons learned paper on its involvement in mission start-up and planning processes. Both reviews will help to strengthen collaboration between UNDP, DPKO and DPA around all aspects of United Nations interventions in mission settings. While the engagement with the development agencies of Member States has always been substantial, UNDP has recently increased its engagement with the political departments related to the Security Council. Beginning with the Syrian Arab Republic, UNDP is co-chairing with DPA integrated task forces to develop the United Nations response in situations characterized by violent conflict or post-conflict recovery, but without a peacekeeping mission. At least two additional task forces of this nature will be co-chaired by the end of 2013. In the process of development of the internal lessons learned paper, UNDP Senior Management will also assess how it will measure engagement in the planning and sequencing of missions, and identify at which point or what triggers will prompt additional management action to ensure effective participation in the planning of these integrated missions.
|2.1 Revise the IMPP guidelines jointly with DPKO, DPA and other United Nations Development Group (UNDG) members||BCPR, Regional Bureaux, BDP (engaging DPA and DPKO)||2013/12||Completed||The revision of the IMPP guidelines completed in April 2013.|
|2.2 Draft a common United Nations policy on transitions jointly with DPKO, DPA and other UNDG members||BCPR, Regional Bureaux, BDP (engaging DPA and DPKO)||2013/06||Completed||Common UN policy on transitions was approved in February 2013|
|2.3 Engage systematically with Member States at key moments in the life of a United Nations mission (including mission planning; the drafting of resolutions of United Nations bodies related to peacekeeping operations and special political missions; and mission drawdown), to highlight a development perspective, the comparative advantages of development actors, in particular UNDP, as well as challenges and opportunities||Regional Bureaux, BCPR||2014/12||Completed||Consultations are being held with Members States at key stages of mission planning processes in accordance with the provisions of the Policy on Integrated Assessment and Planning, approved in April 2013.|
|2.4 UNDP needs to provide appropriate support to the new arrangements adopted by the Secretary-General's Policy Committee in September 2012 for the rule of law in crisis and post-crisis situations whereby UNDP and DPKO are appointed Global Focal Points and are expected to make sure that the whole United Nations acts together in peacekeeping, special political missions and other crisis situations||BCPR, BDP||2013/03||Completed||UNDP jointly with DPKO are responsible and accountable for responding to country-level requests, channeled through United Nations entities on the ground, with timely and quality police, justice and corrections assistance including facilitating access to global knowledge and people, and providing advice on assessments, planning, funding and partnerships. The Global Focal Point arrangement is drawing upon expertise from UN entities, Member States, NGOs, think tanks, and make them available to colleagues in the field.|
|2.5 A corporate UNDP Peacebuilding Strategy has been reviewed and approved by UNDP Senior Management as part of the formulation of the new strategic plan||BCPR||2013/10||No Longer Applicable||The draft of the corporate UNDP Peacebuilding Strategy was developed and presented to the UNDP's OPG in 2013. In view of the structural change, further development of the strategy was no longer required.|
Early recovery remains a key part of UNDP work at the global and country levels. Interventions range from restoring core governance functions, providing support to livelihoods and income-generation activities, mine action and the reintegration of demobilized soldiers. The ability of UNDP to link the humanitarian phase with longterm development efforts has led to increased CPR budgets over the past three years. However, based on the findings of the BCPR Portfolio Review, UNDP recognized the need to reassess its early recovery approach to better respond to the changing patterns of development aid in post-conflict and fragile environments. The review and update of the Guidance Note of the Cluster Working Group on Early Recovery (CWGER) and the UNDP policy on early recovery were launched in May 2012. The conclusions of the review will help UNDP to better identify initiatives that can be included in CAP processes and that provide a more effective link between recovery and development. Importantly, UNDP places great emphasis on working closely with the Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) of the United Nations Secretariat and the Inter- Agency Standing Committee (IASC) in particular on both reviews to ensure that the roles and responsibilities undertaken by UNDP under early recovery are recognized, differentiated from and complementary to the work of humanitarian organizations. A better understanding between UNDP and other humanitarian actors on respective roles, a clearer common definition of early recovery, along with a common set of guiding principles on the scope and funding mechanism for early recovery will prove an important way to facilitate the inclusion of commonly agreed early recovery projects in CAPs and other early recovery funding mechanisms. This closer partnership between UNDP and humanitarian partners could prove central in improving the mobilization of early recovery resources and more effectively bridging the relief-todevelopment continuum.
|3.1 Revise CWGER Guidance Note and the UNDP policy on early recovery, in close cooperation with OCHA, IASC, and the Executive Committee on Humanitarian Affairs (ECHA), and start a global initiative for early recovery resource mobilization, focusing on the specific challenges of immediate post-conflict situations||BCPR, Regional Bureaux, BDP (engaging DPA and DPKO)||2015/12||Overdue-Initiated||BCPR has established a working group to review the policy and consult with relevant stakeholders whilst consultations started within the CWGER and other clusters for the revision of the IASC guidance note on early recovery. (ongoing with expected completion by end-2015).|
|3.2 Provide training and technical support to country office staff for understanding CAPs, project eligibility requirements, humanitarian funding, and the humanitarian system generally to capitalize on the presence of humanitarian actors (that often operate parallel to peacekeeping missions and conflict-related approaches)||OCHA/UNDP/(BCPR)||2014/12||Completed||Support is provided systematically by the UNDP experts on a case-by-case basis in countries where humanitarian cluster system has been rolled out.|
|3.3 Develop UNDP signature products for early recovery and provide training to country offices on the use of these products to allow for a level of predictability and uniformity in terms of its responses in early recovery and its possible inclusion in the Flash Appeals and CAPs||BCPR, UNDP country offices||2013/12||Completed||Signature products have been developed and launched on January 30th, 2013|
Various sources of information are already available regarding institutional arrangements and knowledge on UNDG multi-donor trust funds and UNDP-specific trust funds, such as the Joint Funding approaches section on the UNDG website and the MPTF Office GATEWAY, and the CPR Thematic Trust Fund information on the UNDP/BCPR website. However, UNDP has taken note of the recommendation and the need to make information more readily available to partners on the various modalities that can be used to fund programmes both directly through UNDP, as well as through UNDG arrangements with the UNDP Multi-Partner Trust Fund (MPTF) Office as the administrative agent.
|4.1 Additional guidance and information packages on different options for management of pooled trust funds in which UNDP is involved will be finalized and approved by the UNDP Senior Management. This guidance will elaborate specificities of a spectrum of CPR pooled funds (making a distinction between UNDP trust funds and MPTFs administered by the MPTF Office on behalf of UNDG, including Common Humanitarian Funds (CHFs) and outline options that the country offices will take into account in proposing specific funding modalities for use in CPR environments||BCPR, MPTF Office/ Bureau of Management (BoM), Bureau of External Relations and Advocacy (BERA)||2013/05||Completed||The Bureau of Management and BCPR have collaborated on shaping a new model for the UNDP managing agent role in new CHFs; (2) BCPR is taking the lead in improving UNDP wide advocacy and knowledge sharing around UNDP's managing agent function in existing CHFs; (3) MPTF Office has published paper on "Pooled financing mechanisms for the New Deal"; and (4) Taking into account the results of a UN-wide mapping exercise of interagency pooled Funds, the MPTF Office has prepared a draft paper on "Financing Resilience" (to be finalised in March).|
Although UNDP has been actively involved in the development of Standard Operating Procedures for Delivering as One, to ensure that specific aspects of transition settings were taken into account, a new review by the United Nations Integration Steering Group (ISG), chaired by the Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping, is in the process of developing a common policy on transitions for United Nations missions based on lessons and good practices from across the United Nations system. UNDP is actively involved in this process. UNDP, together with DPKO, OCHA and UNICEF, is currently having regular meetings with key Security Council members, at which critical issues in mission settings including transitions are discussed. UNDP has also initiated a lessons learned study from past mission transitions aimed at developing guidelines for its future action in this area. Contributing to joint and/or collective United Nations activities remains an important priority for UNDP that underpins all activity. However, despite the good intentions of UNDP, it is also important to highlight the fact that any success in this areas will depend on the willingness of all agencies concerned to work together.
|5.1 United Nations-wide policy on integrated mission transition to be developed||Executive Office of the Administrator (EXO), Regional Bureaux, BCPR||2013/06||Completed||The revision of the guidelines on the UN Integrated Mission Planning Process was completed in April 2013 with the approval of a new policy on Integrated Assessment and Planning (IAP)|
|5.2 Lessons learned and guidance for UNDP engagement in integrated mission transitions being developed||BCPR||2013/12||Completed||A lessons learned study of UNMIT?s withdrawal in Timor-Leste was conducted in July-August 2013. A lessons learned study called Beyond Transitions was produced in partnership with Clingendael Institute in the Netherlands. The report was launched in New York in September 2013. Based on the lessons learned draft guidance has been developed. The draft guidance will be implemented in Burundi and Liberia. Based on the lessons from these two cases the guidance will be revised and final guidance note produced.|
|5.3 Contribute to the development of UNDG Standard Operating Procedures for Delivering as One to ensure that they can be fully applied in transition settings||EXO, BCPR through UNDG-ECHA||2014/12||Completed||The relevant provisions , guidances and tools were incorporated in the latestversion of the Standard Operating Procedures issued in August 2014.|
The issue covered by this recommendation has been a UNDP priority for several years. UNDP cooperation with the World Bank in crisis countries increased after the publication of the World Development Report 2011: Conflict, Security and Development in the thematic areas of rule of law, employment creation, disaster risk reduction and crisis governance, including public sector administration and capacity development. UNDP is also chairing the Post-Conflict Needs Assessment Advisory Group, and leads in the United Nations system on joint work with the World Bank on Post- Disaster Needs Assessments (PDNA). The Advisory Group concentrates on further development of the PCNA methodology, and there are efforts to link the PCNA more closely with PDNA. UNDP is also an active participant in a system-wide effort that began in 2010 to strengthen cooperation with the World Bank on the ground in specific countries, supported by a Swiss Trust Fund. A review of this experience will be conducted by the end of 2013 to outline the impact of this cooperation and lessons learned in the first four pilot countries. The conclusions of the review will build on the closer cooperation that has been built between UNDP and the World Bank and will hopefully provide future avenues for increased collaboration.
|6.1 Further develop and finalize the PCNA methodology, in close cooperation with the Development Operations Coordination Office (DOCO) of the United Nations Secretariat, in particular regarding support to country exercises, development of monitoring methodology and involvement of other regional organizations, in particular the regional development banks||BCPR, DOCO||2013/12||Completed||The standard operating procedures (SOPs) recognize that UN country teams and their counterparts need to tailor the implementation of Delivering as One to the particular contexts, including the post-conflict transition|
|6.2 Establish a forum for engagement in job creation in fragile States with the World Bank and other partners; and implement pilot programmes that seek to enhance complementarity and the impact of collaborative support in selected countries||BCPR, BERA, BDP, Regional Bureaux||2014/12||Completed||From 2013-2014, UNDP in partnership with the World Bank and EU, established the New Deal Process planning framework for engagement in fragile states. With financial support from the World Bank, EU, and other donors, such as France and the Africa Development Bank, UNDP implemented fragility assessments and projects addressing fragility in Afghanistan, CAR, Chad, Comoros, DRC, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Somalia, Liberia, Timor-Leste and Yemen.|
|6.3 Engage in joint analysis with the World Bank to identify countries where the PCNA approach might be limited to and would benefit from a more coherent United Nations/ IFIs joint analysis||BERA, BCPR; Regional Bureaux (in consultation with DPA and DPKO as appropriate)||No due date||No deadline established||Joint World Bank/UNDP capacity needs assessments were conducted in Eastern DRC and in Yemen.|
|6.4 Provide guidance and direction through the UNDP Executive Team for protracted crisis and complex emergencies on country-specific situations regarding engagement with the IFIs||Executive Team; Executive Team secretariat; Regional Bureaux; BCPR||2014/12||Completed||Guidance, direction and concrete support is provided to the countries in crisis and post-crisis situations through the UNDP Executive Team on a continuous basis, based on regular country analysis and updates.|
|6.5 Undertake at least two joint assessments with the World Bank of the capacity needs for implementation of peace agreements, and establish joint mechanisms to mobilize resources to meet these needs||BERA, BCPR, Regional Bureaux, the World Bank, Resident Coordinators in concerned countries||2014/12||Completed||Joint World Bank/UNDP capacity needs assessments were conducted in Eastern DRC and in Yemen.|
|6.6 Provide joint implementation support to New Deal pilot countries with the World Bank through donor funded G7+ support mechanism||BCPR, Regional Bureaux||2014/12||Completed||UNDP supported the Government of Somalia and the g7+ in implementing the New Deal and setting up of New Deal coordinating structures, (i.e. High Level Task Force and Compact Working Groups). Following the launch of the New Deal compact in September 2013, A Somalia Development and Reconstruction Facility was developed, with the UNDP and the World bank being members of the Steering Committee. The European Union co-funded New Deal implementation efforts and consultations between May and September 2013, channeled through the UNDP Somalia Country Office. In South Sudan, UNDP has placed its own staff member from July- December 2013 to support the New Deal process. The development of the New Deal compact has happened through an extensive and highly inclusive consultation process among the main stakeholder groups - government, civil society and donors, including the World Bank and UNDP.|
The requirements of ensuring gender equality are already included in the UNDP recruitment policies and procedures. However, it has proven continually difficult to attract female candidates to CPR settings. UNDP will address this challenge and provide additional training for the female UNDP staff and female consultants to be placed in conflict settings.
|7.1 Organize training/skills enhancement activities for female UNDP staff selected to be posted in crisis environments||Office of Human Resources/BoM, BCPR||2014/12||No Longer Applicable|
|7.2 Analyze issues pertaining to attraction and retention of female personnel in crisis environments; develop and implement targeted response actions||BoM, Regional Bureaux||2014/12||No Longer Applicable|
UNDP agrees with the need to ensure that all its projects, whether national implementation (NIM) or direct implementation (DIM), have an appropriate exit strategy and foster capacity-building. This is an important consideration under the current approval process for direct implementation of projects, which is granted to the country offices by their respective Regional Bureaux after consideration of the nature of the special development situation and specific comparative advantages of the country office in managing projects. It is important to clarify that the DIM modality has as much of an emphasis on capacity-building as does NIM. However, in crisis or post-crisis settings, national authorities are least able to cope with procedures imposed upon them by the NIM modality, which are, moreover, different from their normal operating procedures. It is, however, important that both NIM and DIM projects clearly outline their capacitybuilding objectives in line with the exit strategy. UNDP will also review the programme- operating modalities to ensure that there is no misunderstanding concerning how they contribute to national capacity-building.
|8.1 Review a selected number of country offices to determine their compliance with the implementation of UNDP procedures on DIM from the perspective of their impact on national capacity development||OSG/Evaluation Office, Regional Bureaux||2013/12||Completed||The audit of DEX/DIM projects is undertaken periodically by the UNDP?s Office of Audit and Performance Review. In some instances, the Resident Coordinators/Resident Representatives initiate the request to audit DIM/DEX projects.|
|8.2 Refine approval process for DIM by adding a strong national capacity assessment requirement and a clear strategy for capacity enhancement as well as a timeline for transition to NIM||Regional Bureaux, OSG, EXO||2014/12||Completed||The UNDP Programme and Operations Policy and Procedures (POPP) includes a provision for the assessment of the capacity for direct implementation, including a specific assessment tool. The POPP also prescribes that before the DIM arrangments are approvded, the important factors, such as availability of national institutions' capacity to implement and availability of exit strategy need to be assessed.|
|8.3 UNDP Senior Management to assess project implementation modalities for CPR settings in the UNDP programme manual||EXO/OSG/BCPR||2015/12||Overdue-Initiated||All prescriptive content in the UNDP Programme and Operations Policies and Procedures (POPP) is being assessed and revised, including implementation modalities in crisis settings.|
UNDP recognizes the need to continue improving the competencies and quality of staff assigned to conflict settings and will continue to improve training, recruitment systems and incentives within the framework and limits of related regulations.
|9.1 Define specific skills and competencies required for posts in conflict-affected hardship duty stations||BCPR, OHR/BoM||2013/12||Completed||The specific job descriptions for posts in crisis-affected countries are developed in consultations with relevant UNDP bureaus and units|
|9.2 Engage BCPR during the selection and appointment of senior managers for crisis country offices (deputies and above)||OHR/BoM, BCPR||2014/12||Completed||BCPR senior managers participate in the selection panels established for recruitment of senior managers for country offices affected by crisis.|
|9.3 Develop and introduce a team approach for assigning senior managers to crisis country offices, taking into account the capacities of the country office management team as a whole with the goal of filling capacity gaps||OHR/BoM||2014/12||Completed||The job descriptions for senior managers' posts in crisis-affected countries are developed in consultations with relevant UNDP bureaus and units. These job descriptions incorporate specific requirements for relevant competencies and skills.|
|9.4 Ensure that a staff member with skills in political analysis, facilitation, and conflict resolution is available to support the Resident Coordinator/Resident Representative in at least half (i.e., 20) of 40 priority countries||BCPR, DPA, Regional Bureaux||2014/12||Completed||Peace and Development advisors (PDAs) are deployed based on the requested from country offices. Each year, the PDAs are deployed in more than 35 countries globally.|
UNDP guidelines for planning, monitoring and evaluation of interventions in crisis settings are contained in the ?Compendium #1 ? Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation in Conflict Prevention and Recovery Settings?. However, UNDP acknowledges the point made in the recommendation and the fact that the current Compendium does not address the specific issues of programme effectiveness, particularly in post-disaster settings. A recent review of the BCPR programme portfolio in CPR settings conducted jointly with Regional and Central Bureaux further stressed the need to implement existing guidance in this area in order to strengthen programme relevance and effectiveness, identify areas for strategic investment to maximize impact, and refocus on capacity development in CPR settings. A detailed action plan was established to implement the recommendations for the review, and includes the development of a special monitoring and evaluation system for crisis-affected countries that includes crisis-sensitive indicators, frequent contextual analyses, and more frequent monitoring visits. BCPR is also undertaking a pilot initiative to spearhead a new approach to monitoring and evaluation in conflict settings.
|10.1 Introduce and roll out a new results based management support package to country offices||Operations Support Group (OSG)||2013/01||Completed||UNDP has developed the Country Office Support Initiative (COSI), with the objective of strengthening the practices of Results-Based Management, and supporting offices in this process of adapting to the new Strategic Plan. The initiative was successfully rolled-out to country offices, seeking to improve practices and strengthen the culture of RBM in the organization, as well as monitor the implementation of the Strategic Plan on a structural level from a results-based approach in a complex, changing and multidisciplinary development contexts.|
|10.2 The definition of CPR relevant indicators will be part of the formulation of results chains for the new UNDP strategic plan||OSG/BCPR/BDP||2014/12||Completed||The crisis prevention and recovery indicators have been incorporated in the results framework of the Strategic Plan.|
|10.3 BCPR to spearhead pilot phase of new monitoring and evaluation approach in two pilot countries||BCPR, Regional Bureaux, OSG||2013/12||Completed||Pilot phase of the project of using narrative-based methodologies for Outcome monitoring was completed in Sudan, DRC and Pakistan. Representatives from three country offices were trained in Sensemaker methodology for data collection and analysis. The project will continue in 2014 with data collection and lessons learned to be produced in second half of 2014.|