- Evaluation Plan:
- 2012-2015, Zimbabwe
- Evaluation Type:
- Mid Term Project
- Planned End Date:
- 12/2013
- Completion Date:
- 04/2014
- Status:
- Completed
- Management Response:
- Yes
- Evaluation Budget(US $):
- 33,182
Mid-Term Evaluation of the Support to Peace Building and Increased Access to Sustainable Livelihoods (PBSL) Programme in Zimbabwe: 2012 - 2014
| Document | Type | Language | Size | Status | Downloads |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 ToR for Mid-Term Evaluation 20012014.pdf |
tor | English | 1284.13 KB | Posted | 407 |
| Midterm Evaluation Report of the UNDP Zimbabwe Integrated Peace Building Programme.pdf |
report | English | 1124.27 KB | Posted | 2018 |
| Title | Mid-Term Evaluation of the Support to Peace Building and Increased Access to Sustainable Livelihoods (PBSL) Programme in Zimbabwe: 2012 - 2014 | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atlas Project Number: | 00079951 | ||||||||||||
| Evaluation Plan: | 2012-2015, Zimbabwe | ||||||||||||
| Evaluation Type: | Mid Term Project | ||||||||||||
| Status: | Completed | ||||||||||||
| Completion Date: | 04/2014 | ||||||||||||
| Planned End Date: | 12/2013 | ||||||||||||
| Management Response: | Yes | ||||||||||||
| Focus Area: |
|
||||||||||||
| Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021) |
|
||||||||||||
| Evaluation Budget(US $): | 33,182 | ||||||||||||
| Source of Funding: | UNDP | ||||||||||||
| Joint Programme: | No | ||||||||||||
| Joint Evaluation: | No | ||||||||||||
| Evaluation Team members: |
|
||||||||||||
| GEF Evaluation: | No | ||||||||||||
| Key Stakeholders: | GoZ, UNDP | ||||||||||||
| Countries: | ZIMBABWE |
| Lessons | |
|---|---|
| Findings |
| Recommendations | |
|---|---|
| 1 | Undertake a situational analysis to inform programme revision and strategies, and to identify current drivers of conflict and opportunities for peace building |
| 2 | Involve all levels of stakeholders, including the RPs and the private sector, in the redesign of the PBSL |
| 3 | Consolidate PBSL gains to date, and focus on activities in these areas which will be critical to support the nascent NPRC, and which will be feasible to undertake in the time currently remaining for the programme, for example, the conflict prevention and resolution activities and the creation of local peace committees |
| 4 | Integrate more information on CPMRT and the IPA into the Livelihoods and DRM components at each level |
| 5 | Develop private sector linkages: Map the private sector entities active in the PBSL districts to identify potential partnerships to add value to the PBSL activities through |
| 6 | Increased on-the-job-training, trainee placement and mentoring support to livelihood beneficiaries, as well as other kinds of job creation through PPPs |
| 7 | Community Participatory Monitoring: Introduce CPM at the grassroots level for greater cost effectiveness in monitoring widely scattered, remote project sites. |
| 8 | Select and use a common platform for real-time information sharing among partners, e.g. UNDP Team works |
| 9 | Increase engagement by UNDP, ONHRI and the GoZ at the most senior level with RPs and other partners around the IPA and its benefits, in alignment with the GoZ vision. In particular, re-engage with DCP, as it has demonstrated its ability to deliver PBSL outputs, although it shows little enthusiasm for its role as an RP. |
| 10 | Clarify the roles and accountability mechanisms of meso-level actors, e.g. among and between RPs, UNDP Technical FPs and the PBSL PC |
| 11 | Provide additional support to the PBSL ? at a minimum, a UNV to support administrative matters and to assist in the coordination of project reporting. |
1. Recommendation: Undertake a situational analysis to inform programme revision and strategies, and to identify current drivers of conflict and opportunities for peace building
Management Response: [Added: 2014/05/21]
A situational analysis will be integrated into the re-designed programme to identify existing opportunities for peacebuilding. A two prong approach is proposed: i) A desk review of existing secondary information and data and ii) A targeted activity for undertaking a Problem analysis as part of the programme with a focus on the current areas of engagement.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - Convene a partners` meeting to analyze and document findings
- Develop a situational analysis report
[Added: 2014/05/21] [Last Updated: 2016/08/17] |
GGM and PRHIV Units | 2014/09 | Completed | The findings of the Mid-Term Review were reviewed through the consultative process leading to the design of the successor Programme, and are reflected in the Prodoc. History |
2. Recommendation: Involve all levels of stakeholders, including the RPs and the private sector, in the redesign of the PBSL
Management Response: [Added: 2014/05/21]
Consultative meetings have been held between the GoZ (OPC through the ONHRI) and UNDP for the revision of the PBSL framework and redesign process. A draft re-designed programme framework is in place and will form the basis for consultations with RPs. Further engagements are proposed with RPs in the form of a round table where the draft will be reviewed and revised before finalization.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - Convene a meeting with partners to review the revised programme document
- Convene an orientation meeting for technical persons involved in the implementation of the revised programme
[Added: 2014/05/21] [Last Updated: 2016/08/17] |
GGM and PRHIV Units | 2014/05 | Completed | This was done as evidenced in the Programme Steering Committee Meetings and the validation meeting for the successor Programme. History |
3. Recommendation: Consolidate PBSL gains to date, and focus on activities in these areas which will be critical to support the nascent NPRC, and which will be feasible to undertake in the time currently remaining for the programme, for example, the conflict prevention and resolution activities and the creation of local peace committees
Management Response: [Added: 2014/05/21]
The re-design efforts are largely informed by the provision for the NPRC in the constitution. The new programme is anchored on strengthening the National Peace Architecture. The PBSL MTE, DFF evaluation, documentation of peace practices feed into the re-design of the programme with a focus on strengthening the NPRC. ONHRI`s experiences and lessons learnt will also be documented and used as a reference document by the NPRC.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - Document ONHRI`s experiences and lessons learnt since 2009
- Develop the final report for the research of the history of conflict resolution in Zimbabwe
[Added: 2014/05/21] [Last Updated: 2016/08/17] |
GGM Unit | 2014/11 | Completed | This was completed in 2015, in the attached documentation of ONHRI's experiences (2009-2014), hereby attached. History |
4. Recommendation: Integrate more information on CPMRT and the IPA into the Livelihoods and DRM components at each level
Management Response: [Added: 2014/05/21]
The revised programme framework will mainstream conflict sensitive programming on livelihoods and DRM. Furthermore, selected pilot sites/areas will implement integrated programming to demonstrate synergies across all programme components
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - Integrate conflict sensitive programming into livelihoods and DRM in the revised programme
- Identify possible sites/areas to demonstrate an integrated programming for all programme components
- Pilot integrated programming in selected sites/areas
[Added: 2014/05/21] [Last Updated: 2016/08/17] |
GGM and PRHIV Units | 2014/09 | Completed | Conflict sensitive programming was integrated throughout the Programme (2014-2015), while an Area Based Approach was piloted in Binga to demonstrate the integrated programming approach. This is evidenced in both the 2014 and 2015 Annual Report. History |
5. Recommendation: Develop private sector linkages: Map the private sector entities active in the PBSL districts to identify potential partnerships to add value to the PBSL activities through
Management Response: [Added: 2014/05/21]
A private sector mapping will be integrated in the Situational Analysis proposed. Based on the outcomes, RPs could be encouraged to reflect more keenly on role of the private sector in building social cohesion, especially on the linkages between youth, livelihoods, employment, financial and material support towards peace building and livelihoods activities.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - Conduct private sector mapping
- Develop private sector collaboration plan
[Added: 2014/05/21] [Last Updated: 2016/08/17] |
GGM and PRHIV Units | 2014/11 | No Longer Applicable | Despite efforts to engage with the private sector, this recommendation could not be fully applicable in the new Programme. This is among others due to the complex economic situation. History |
6. Recommendation: Increased on-the-job-training, trainee placement and mentoring support to livelihood beneficiaries, as well as other kinds of job creation through PPPs
Management Response: [Added: 2014/05/21]
Some attempts have been made to integrate skills development under livelihoods output of the revised programme document. This could benefit from PPP engagements on livelihoods, market linkages and employment.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Integrate components of private sector skills development in the private sector collaboration plan
[Added: 2014/05/21] [Last Updated: 2016/08/17] |
GGM and PRHIV Units | 2014/10 | Completed | To a certain extent, business entrepreneurship training were carried out for the livelihood component, and the SACCOs. This is reflected in the 2015 Annual Report. History |
7. Recommendation: Community Participatory Monitoring: Introduce CPM at the grassroots level for greater cost effectiveness in monitoring widely scattered, remote project sites.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/05/21]
Noted. this could prove to be cost effective and we could explore its feasibility in the field. A tailor-made training and skills exchange on CPM for RPs will be implemented.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - Develop a CPM materials for livelihoods RPs
- Implement CPM on Livelihoods component
[Added: 2014/05/21] [Last Updated: 2016/08/17] |
Poverty | 2014/10 | Completed | History |
8. Recommendation: Select and use a common platform for real-time information sharing among partners, e.g. UNDP Team works
Management Response: [Added: 2014/05/21]
Noted
Key Actions:
9. Recommendation: Increase engagement by UNDP, ONHRI and the GoZ at the most senior level with RPs and other partners around the IPA and its benefits, in alignment with the GoZ vision. In particular, re-engage with DCP, as it has demonstrated its ability to deliver PBSL outputs, although it shows little enthusiasm for its role as an RP.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/05/21]
The revised programme recommends that OPC serves as the IP and it's expected that as the IP, OPC is capable of ensuring a high level participation within the Programme board etc. In addition high level meeting of partners with UNDP will be facilitated at least once every year.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Convene a briefing meeting for senior officials from partner organisations
[Added: 2014/05/21] [Last Updated: 2016/08/17] |
GGM Unit | 2014/06 | Completed | This was done in 2014 to get buy-in from all partners into the Programme. History |
10. Recommendation: Clarify the roles and accountability mechanisms of meso-level actors, e.g. among and between RPs, UNDP Technical FPs and the PBSL PC
Management Response: [Added: 2014/05/21]
The roles and accountability mechanisms between RPs have been defined within the re-designed programme and also will be explained in the review workshop
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spell out roles and accountability of partners in the revised programme framework
[Added: 2014/05/21] |
GGM and PRHIV Units | 2014/03 | Completed |
11. Recommendation: Provide additional support to the PBSL ? at a minimum, a UNV to support administrative matters and to assist in the coordination of project reporting.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/05/21]
Noted. this will be discussed with the relevant partners
Key Actions: