- Evaluation Plan:
- 2013-2017, India
- Evaluation Type:
- Final Project
- Planned End Date:
- 01/2014
- Completion Date:
- 03/2013
- Status:
- Completed
- Management Response:
- Yes
- Evaluation Budget(US $):
- 30,000
Terminal evaluation - Capacity Development for Local Governance
| Document | Type | Language | Size | Status | Downloads |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Terminal Evaluation Capacity Development for Local Governance.pdf |
report | English | 457.84 KB | Posted | 595 |
| Title | Terminal evaluation - Capacity Development for Local Governance | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atlas Project Number: | 00061110 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Plan: | 2013-2017, India | ||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Type: | Final Project | ||||||||||||||||||
| Status: | Completed | ||||||||||||||||||
| Completion Date: | 03/2013 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Planned End Date: | 01/2014 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Management Response: | Yes | ||||||||||||||||||
| Focus Area: |
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021) |
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Budget(US $): | 30,000 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Source of Funding: | Core | ||||||||||||||||||
| Joint Programme: | No | ||||||||||||||||||
| Joint Evaluation: | No | ||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Team members: |
|
||||||||||||||||||
| GEF Evaluation: | No | ||||||||||||||||||
| Key Stakeholders: | |||||||||||||||||||
| Countries: | INDIA |
| Lessons | |
|---|---|
| Findings |
| Recommendations | |
|---|---|
| 1 | ?Institutionally, the same arrangements can be continued with MoPR as the national ministry and DoPR at the state level. There is a need to associate with other actors like the various development departments of relevance to Panchayati Raj, Finance Commissions and Election Commissions |
| 2 | Most of the UNDP supported projects on governance have relevance to local governments. Considering this and the limited resources, it would have more impact potential if a single project with multiple partners with role clarity be instituted rather than many projects. Possibility of linking with projects of similar nature supported by other UN agencies also needs to be probed |
| 3 | While MoPR would demand extension of the project to other states, considering the limited resources available and the availability of funds with the governments, it would be better to focus on the seven states where the first phase has been rolled out. Possibility of linking with projects of similar nature supported by other UN agencies also needs to be probed |
| 4 | One concern raised was the role of such projects in advocacy, especially for social inclusion through Panchayati Raj. Can UNDP work on advocacy through NEX method? It might be difficult. But even within NEX, there are possibilities of providing support for advocacy through studies, workshops, policy briefs etc. There again, it is dependent on the partner state and institute interests. Will it be better to work with NGOs and other civil society organisations for strengthening local governance? Conceptually this is an attractive solution. However, the effort and resources required to make an impact across the country or even a few states would be large. Moreover, care also will have to be taken not to end such initiatives as individual NGO project activities. But a judicious mix of activities with various governments, institutes and NGOs could be tried out |
1. Recommendation: ?Institutionally, the same arrangements can be continued with MoPR as the national ministry and DoPR at the state level. There is a need to associate with other actors like the various development departments of relevance to Panchayati Raj, Finance Commissions and Election Commissions
Management Response: [Added: 2015/11/17]
Agree with recommendation. However, owing to a realignment of priorities of the government and UNDP resource constraints, since 2013, technical support is being provided at the national level to the Ministry of Panchayati Raj. No activities are being undertaken at the state level. Since 2014, UNDP has held two consultations on implications of the Fourteenth Finance Commission on local governments and has initiated discussions with MOPR and several State Governments to design proposals for UNDP implementation support services for strengthening local governance and decentralized planning (with government funding).
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Proposals for demand-based implementation support services to 3-4 state governments developed
[Added: 2015/11/17] [Last Updated: 2017/08/22] |
Democratic Governance | 2015/12 | Completed | Proposals developed based on request from state governments of Odisha, Rajasthan, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh Funding from 1 state, Haryana has been approved but pending approval of ministry of finance History |
2. Recommendation: Most of the UNDP supported projects on governance have relevance to local governments. Considering this and the limited resources, it would have more impact potential if a single project with multiple partners with role clarity be instituted rather than many projects. Possibility of linking with projects of similar nature supported by other UN agencies also needs to be probed
Management Response: [Added: 2015/11/17]
Agree with recommendation
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Discussions held with MOPR on coordinated UN response
[Added: 2015/11/17] [Last Updated: 2017/08/22] |
UNDP | 2015/12 | Completed | Concept note developed in discussion with government and UN partners to meet on Oct 12, 2015 to share concept and discuss next steps History |
3. Recommendation: While MoPR would demand extension of the project to other states, considering the limited resources available and the availability of funds with the governments, it would be better to focus on the seven states where the first phase has been rolled out. Possibility of linking with projects of similar nature supported by other UN agencies also needs to be probed
Management Response: [Added: 2015/11/17]
As mentioned above, owing to reduced resources, activities have been restricted to national level so far. However, since 2014 UNDP has initiated discussions with MOPR and several State Governments to design proposals for UNDP implementation support services for strengthening local governance and decentralized planning (with government funding
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Proposals for demand-based implementation support services to 3-4 state governments developed
[Added: 2015/11/17] [Last Updated: 2017/08/22] |
UNDP | 2015/12 | Completed | Proposals developed based on request from state governments of Odisha, Rajasthan, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh Funding from 1 state, Haryana has been approved but pending approval of ministry of finance History |
4. Recommendation: One concern raised was the role of such projects in advocacy, especially for social inclusion through Panchayati Raj. Can UNDP work on advocacy through NEX method? It might be difficult. But even within NEX, there are possibilities of providing support for advocacy through studies, workshops, policy briefs etc. There again, it is dependent on the partner state and institute interests. Will it be better to work with NGOs and other civil society organisations for strengthening local governance? Conceptually this is an attractive solution. However, the effort and resources required to make an impact across the country or even a few states would be large. Moreover, care also will have to be taken not to end such initiatives as individual NGO project activities. But a judicious mix of activities with various governments, institutes and NGOs could be tried out
Management Response: [Added: 2015/11/17]
The National Implementation Modality is ideal from the point of view of ownership of the government. Advocacy activities are undertaken through another project which provides flexibility of direct implementation
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Support advocacy activities through projects that support direct implementation
[Added: 2015/11/17] |
UNDP | 2015/12 | Completed |