Mid Term Evaluation of UNDP's Regional Programme for Europe and the CIS 2014-2017

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2014-2017, RBEC
Evaluation Type:
Outcome
Planned End Date:
03/2016
Completion Date:
04/2016
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
90,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document TOR_Evaluation_MTE-MTR RPE RBEC.docx tor English 34.86 KB Posted 319
Download document Mid-term Assessment of UNDP ECIS Regional Programme Evaluation Report.pdf report English 5676.82 KB Posted 384
Title Mid Term Evaluation of UNDP's Regional Programme for Europe and the CIS 2014-2017
Atlas Project Number:
Evaluation Plan: 2014-2017, RBEC
Evaluation Type: Outcome
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 04/2016
Planned End Date: 03/2016
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Poverty and MDG
  • 2. Democratic Governance
  • 3. Crisis Prevention & Recovery
  • 4. Environment & Sustainable Development
  • 5. Cross-cutting Development Issue
  • 6. Others
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017)
  • 1. Output 1.1. National and sub-national systems and institutions enabled to achieve structural transformation of productive capacities that are sustainable and employment - and livelihoods- intensive
  • 2. Output 1.3. Solutions developed at national and sub-national levels for sustainable management of natural resources, ecosystem services, chemicals and waste
  • 3. Output 1.4. Scaled up action on climate change adaptation and mitigation across sectors which is funded and implemented
  • 4. Output 1.5. Inclusive and sustainable solutions adopted to achieve increased energy efficiency and universal modern energy access (especially off-grid sources of renewable energy)
  • 5. Output 2.2. Institutions and systems enabled to address awareness, prevention and enforcement of anti-corruption measures across sectors and stakeholders
  • 6. Output 2.3 Capacities of human rights institutions strengthened
  • 7. Output 3.3. National institutions, systems, laws and policies strengthened for equitable, accountable and effective delivery of HIV and related services
  • 8. Output 4.4. Measures in place to increase women's participation in decision-making
  • 9. Output 5.1. Mechanisms in place to assess natural and man-made risks at national and sub-national levels
  • 10. Output 5.2. Effective institutional, legislative and policy frameworks in place to enhance the implementation of disaster and climate risk management measures at national and sub-national levels
  • 11. Output 5.4. Preparedness systems in place to effectively address the consequences of and response to natural hazards (e.g. geo-physical and climate related) and man-made crisis at all levels of government and community
  • 12. Output 5.5. Policy frameworks and institutional mechanisms enabled at the national and sub-national levels for the peaceful management of emerging and recurring conflicts and tensions
  • 13. Output 7.2. Global and national data collection, measurement and analytical systems in place to monitor progress on the post 2015 agenda and sustainable development goals
  • 14. Output 7.3. National development plans to address poverty and inequality are sustainable and risk resilient
  • 15. Output 7.5 South-South and Triangular cooperation partnerships established and/or strengthened for development solutions
  • 16. Output 7.6. Innovations enabled for development solutions, partnerships and other collaborative arrangements
  • 17. Output 7.7 Mechanisms in place to generate and share knowledge about development solutions
  • 18. Output 1.2. Options enabled and facilitated for inclusive and sustainable social protection
Evaluation Budget(US $): 90,000
Source of Funding: Regular Programme Resources
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 68,000
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Olena Krylova Governance Evaluation Expert lena.krylova@bluewin.ch
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders: RBEC, COs
Comments:

The Mid-Term Evaluation covers assessment of 4 Outcomes of the ECIS Regional Programme as per the Evaluation Plan for 2014-2017.

Lessons
1.

Lessons learned are reflected throughout the whole Evaluation report.


Findings
1.

The 4 broad Outcomes with contributing Outputs under the RPD were overall relevant for the region. Despite the fact that the IRH was affected by several simultaneous “shocks” during the last 2 years (relocation process from Bratislava to Istanbul, corporate restructuring process affecting the regional practice architecture and causing significant staff turnover and budget cuts), and thus some disruption in the delivery during the first year of the RP implementation, the effectiveness of IRH under all outcomes was overall strong, with the vast majority of the plans achieved at midterm. The RP marks an alignment with the overall programmatic framework and planned results of the UNDP Strategic Plan, 2014-2017 and the CPs. This vertical alignment has a potential to facilitate the aggregation of results capturing lessons learnt both vertically and horizontally (across the regions) and replication of successful approaches facilitating the efficiency of the work of the regional center. Overall, the IRH operations were efficient in its pursuit of contributing to the 4 identified Outcomes, and this is rather remarkable, given that the IRH has gone through significant structural changes internally, and budget cuts, working essentially with limited staff. Overall the IRH led initiatives (projects and services) have good potential for sustainability, assured in particular, by the large share of work aimed at assisting the countries with policies and institutional capacities.


Recommendations
1

Recommendation 1: Enhance the efforts aimed at completing the programmatic alignment within the IRH institutional structure This is a high priority, since the IRH will need to work in an integrated manner to deliver the RP outcomes; this will also allow to capitalize better on synergies. It needs to be ensured that the COs have a clear cut and easy way to identify what service and how they can expect from the IRH. It is also necessary to consolidate the support packages for particular countries.

2

Recommendation 2. Identify more clearly the areas of focus/services lines covered by each team and each outcome (boundaries). SDGs should be used as a vehicle to reposition the work within the RP as well an opportunity for better articulation of the service lines and approaches for the teams/under Outcomes. For example, it is recommended that the IRH:

  • further enhances the work in the nexus of employment/ social inclusion (as well as jobs and livelihoods) integrating it with the planned closer engagement in social assistance (as social inclusion is inclusive of social assistance) linked to other core areas, e.g. access to energy and water services and ABD, as well as better captures various aspects of discrimination and marginalization and more comprehensively tackled employment/labour policies;
  • identifies better the service lines under NRM and links them better with other areas (e.g. adaptation); more emphasis is needed on supporting the countries with attracting funding for the scaled up actions targeting adaptation to climate change;

  • identifies clearly the approaches to engage in ABD based both on the lessons learned from UNDP past experience but also emerging trends from elsewhere (e.g. the “place based” approach of OECD)123 and revitalizes the “local governance” practice area, using localization of SDGs to enhance this process, as well as specific approaches and concepts promoted by UNDP in the region, within the framework of RP (e.g. conflict-sensitive work).

  • elaborates a strategy for sustaining and furthering the engagement in anti-corruption by consolidating the work on OD in the Balkans, awareness-building, and stimulating both demand and supply for AC and OD in other sub-regions, as well as feeding the achievements in AC domain into other streams of UNDP work in the region;

  • invests in (a) follow up and scaling up the work on sustainable national financing for HIV response based on previous investments; (b) advocacy against punitive and discriminatory laws, supporting the self-reliance of the HIV related rights networks; and (c) furthers the work on NCDs and “environment-health” nexus, as these areas open new and highly relevant programming opportunities for the region;

  • refocuses and consolidates the Human Rights and Rule of Law portfolio to reflect the changes in the current demand by the COs with an emphasis on: strengthening the links between HR and RoL, reframing the work on “special ability”/ PWD as part of a wider support for anti-discrimination agenda; promotion of HR standards (building on existing achievements, like Kiev Declaration) and NHRI capacity building (including engagement in the countries with “difficult” context/ poor HR record); the successes from SEESAC (the RSSRP, security sector reforms with focus on promotion of gender equality and SGBV) could be built on and shared.

3

Recommendation 3: Improve the systems for gender mainstreaming. In particular, there is a need to improve various internal processes to ensure the integration of gender dimension and gender results in the RDP outcomes and outputs with the support from the gender team, and systematically bring in the gender dimension in IRH responses to CO requests for advisory services even if the original request for support omits it (e.g. through the inclusion of the gender specialists in the responses, practising joint country missions.) etc. All Team leaders should share the responsibility and be hold accountable for integrating gender in the work of their teams. To facilitate this process, an establishment of a Gender Steering group with representatives from all programme clusters chaired by senior management can be considered. In the current context where donor support for women’s targeted projects focus mainly on UN Women, UNDP needs to position itself more strongly as a gender mainstreaming agency that promotes gender equality and invests in women’s empowerment across all development interventions (including emphasizing the role of women in the context of growing demand for conflict prevention and peacebuilding).

4

Recommendation 4: In relation to conflict prevention, continue to institute measures that will strengthen the sustainability of the current support, including those initiatives under the UNDP/DPA Joint Program (JP). In particular, in relation to the JP, redouble efforts to enhance local and national capacities for conflict prevention, including through deeper civil society partnerships. Use the JP architecture to further the RP portfolio in conflict prevention and preventing violent extremism (PVE), ensuring closer links to UNDP CO work and investing more in action-orientated analysis.

5

Recommendation 5: Continue and expand the use of the Catalytic Facility (experimenting with using some funding for cultivating demand among the COs for selected strategic agenda items) using less demanding application and reporting procedures. Create “invited” spaces for the COs for highly relevant initiatives related to promoting sensitive agenda or cultivating demand for certain issues (e.g. gender equality) targeting less involved countries, but exercise care: only when there is a strong indication that these funds can be used as seed funding initiating project developments IRH funding from the Catalytic Facility could be allocated based on discussions with COs rather than using competition format.

6

Recommendation 6: In the context of further mainstreaming of innovation, ensure that all the levels at the COs are involved and are enthusiastic about testing new ideas. Build upon the current successful examples in sharing the partnership building and innovations experience with other regions moving towards developing it as a service line by the IRH. It should be insured that the higher management level of the COs, who, by the nature of their work might be more inclined to act safe and avoid extra inputs of resources where there is a possibility of failure (hence also the need to encourage the “allowance to fail” culture) are involved in and share the move to innovation led programming. There is also a need to build in clear incentives for both management and staff to engage with innovation activities in an effort to move from experimentation to mainstreaming and having innovation clearly integrated in day to day programming.

7

Recommendation 7: In designing regional projects, it is important to pay specific attention to the factors that will enhance the regional value added and align the design elements accordingly; where justified pass on to the COs the management of the country specific components in full. In particular, it is important to focus (and not spread too thin), allow for flexibility (e.g. use only a few and most useful indicators), and enable capturing regional lessons through design (e.g. have some common elements). Involving CO professional staff in the design of the regional projects (below RR and DRR level) to boost COs’ ownership of the regional projects.

8

Recommendation 8: More systematically analyze the work and achievements of the COs related to each area of service of the IRH and promote sharing. Adopt a more consolidated approach in relation to the support of specific countries. Jointly with the COs and based on the systematic analysis of the portfolios of the COs identify the best practices to share (for all the service lines of the IRH) and facilitate experience sharing among the COs (including via efficient use of the Knowledge Gate). Use more the expertise available at the COs (CO staff) to share best practices. Ensure that there is a better coordination among the IRH teams in supporting given countries as well as more coordination/consultation with the COs during the design of regional projects and initiatives.

9

Recommendation 9: Take a clear stand on aligning available resources with the RP priorities and pilot the introduction of cost recovery models for service provision, but without losing the perspective of the important analytical work for which there might not be “paying” demand immediately. The scale of the resource base should be aligned with the scale of the expectations from the RP better. In the context of the “demand-driven” orientation in service provision and a general reluctance among donors to fund noncountry specific initiatives, the introduction of cost-recovery mechanisms, at least to some extent may be unavoidable. The IRH should look at the experience of other regional offices (e.g. in the Pacific) and pilot the new scheme starting with the services that are in most demand (e.g. programming support linked to resource mobilization). In this context it is also advised to analyse closer the trends in the service tracker with the areas of low demand but high relevance. While the introduction of cost-recovery mechanisms, at least to some extent may be unavoidable, it is important to preserve the space for the analytical work, which might not be “payable” immediately, as well as ensuring that the capacity of the IRH as providers of expertise is maintained and built upon.

10

Recommendation 10: Minimise the impact of understaffing of the teams on prospective/ important areas of the IRH work. While it is clear that the freeze on future hiring is unlikely to ease soon, there are a few areas where the demand is going to grow rapidly (e.g. SDGs, LED, NRM, AC) and the current staffing will not suffice. In particular, while it is clear that a lot of the work related to SDGs will be done by thematic teams, there is a need to have a dedicated person to coordinate analysis as well as cover the work on the HDRs. The staffing needs/adjustments need to be kept under focus continuously and reasonable solutions found to meet the most urgent needs. The scheme of buying staff time from the COs is an innovative idea but needs to be streamlined to avoid putting excess workload on this staff. This is likely to require more time to be spent by this staff at the IRH and increasing the share of time dedicated to the IRH (perhaps 50 percent).

1. Recommendation:

Recommendation 1: Enhance the efforts aimed at completing the programmatic alignment within the IRH institutional structure This is a high priority, since the IRH will need to work in an integrated manner to deliver the RP outcomes; this will also allow to capitalize better on synergies. It needs to be ensured that the COs have a clear cut and easy way to identify what service and how they can expect from the IRH. It is also necessary to consolidate the support packages for particular countries.

Management Response: [Added: 2016/08/11] [Last Updated: 2016/08/18]

UNDP accepts this recommendation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1.1. Set up systems and processes to ensure integrated /cross-team approaches (e.g. coordination groups on SDGs and other areas, creation of SDG editorial board), including on provision of advisory services.
[Added: 2016/08/18] [Last Updated: 2017/02/14]
IRH Manager, Senior Programme Coordinator, Team Leaders, CO Support Team No due date Completed The action is ongoing without any due-date. However, the coordination mechanisms were effectively set up to ensure cross-team and integrated approaches within IRH work. History
1.2. Establish Who is Who and Meet the Team (IRH structure) under the RBEC Knowledge Management Gateway to facilitate access of COs to staff profiles.
[Added: 2016/08/18]
Senior Programme Coordinator, Team Leaders 2016/05 Completed
1.3. Encourage CO initiatives that apply issue-based, innovative, integrated multidisciplinary approaches through the Catalytic and Scaling Up Facility
[Added: 2016/08/18]
IRH Manager, Senior Programme Coordinator, Team Leaders 2016/06 Completed
2. Recommendation:

Recommendation 2. Identify more clearly the areas of focus/services lines covered by each team and each outcome (boundaries). SDGs should be used as a vehicle to reposition the work within the RP as well an opportunity for better articulation of the service lines and approaches for the teams/under Outcomes. For example, it is recommended that the IRH:

  • further enhances the work in the nexus of employment/ social inclusion (as well as jobs and livelihoods) integrating it with the planned closer engagement in social assistance (as social inclusion is inclusive of social assistance) linked to other core areas, e.g. access to energy and water services and ABD, as well as better captures various aspects of discrimination and marginalization and more comprehensively tackled employment/labour policies;
  • identifies better the service lines under NRM and links them better with other areas (e.g. adaptation); more emphasis is needed on supporting the countries with attracting funding for the scaled up actions targeting adaptation to climate change;

  • identifies clearly the approaches to engage in ABD based both on the lessons learned from UNDP past experience but also emerging trends from elsewhere (e.g. the “place based” approach of OECD)123 and revitalizes the “local governance” practice area, using localization of SDGs to enhance this process, as well as specific approaches and concepts promoted by UNDP in the region, within the framework of RP (e.g. conflict-sensitive work).

  • elaborates a strategy for sustaining and furthering the engagement in anti-corruption by consolidating the work on OD in the Balkans, awareness-building, and stimulating both demand and supply for AC and OD in other sub-regions, as well as feeding the achievements in AC domain into other streams of UNDP work in the region;

  • invests in (a) follow up and scaling up the work on sustainable national financing for HIV response based on previous investments; (b) advocacy against punitive and discriminatory laws, supporting the self-reliance of the HIV related rights networks; and (c) furthers the work on NCDs and “environment-health” nexus, as these areas open new and highly relevant programming opportunities for the region;

  • refocuses and consolidates the Human Rights and Rule of Law portfolio to reflect the changes in the current demand by the COs with an emphasis on: strengthening the links between HR and RoL, reframing the work on “special ability”/ PWD as part of a wider support for anti-discrimination agenda; promotion of HR standards (building on existing achievements, like Kiev Declaration) and NHRI capacity building (including engagement in the countries with “difficult” context/ poor HR record); the successes from SEESAC (the RSSRP, security sector reforms with focus on promotion of gender equality and SGBV) could be built on and shared.

Management Response: [Added: 2016/08/11] [Last Updated: 2016/08/18]

UNDP accepts this recommendation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
2.1. Establish and maintain team spaces (including a joint one on SDGs) on the KM Gateway with clear substantive areas, within which advisory services are offered.
[Added: 2016/08/18]
Team Leaders No due date Initiated The action is ongoing without any due date.
2.2. Implement comprehensive annual planning and reporting process (e.g. team discussions on regional programme AWP and progress reporting).
[Added: 2016/08/18] [Last Updated: 2017/02/14]
IRH Manager, Senior Programme Coordinator, Team Leaders 2017/01 Completed IRH ensures team discussions on planning and reporting through review meetings in the beginning of each year. Annual planning and reporting then goes through comprehensive mechanism of ensuring that COs are involved throughout the processes. COs are serving as Project Board members in all projects, then the planning and reporting is also revalidated at the Regional Advisory Board level. History
2.3. Conduct a series of workshops/retreats internally and with participation of COs to ensure support to SDG implementation at country and regional level.
[Added: 2016/08/18] [Last Updated: 2017/02/14]
IRH Manager, SD Team Leader and other IRH Team Leaders No due date Initiated The action is ongoing without any due date. Only last year a number of internal and external workshops took place to build capacities of COs and national partners on the SDG implementation. History
3. Recommendation:

Recommendation 3: Improve the systems for gender mainstreaming. In particular, there is a need to improve various internal processes to ensure the integration of gender dimension and gender results in the RDP outcomes and outputs with the support from the gender team, and systematically bring in the gender dimension in IRH responses to CO requests for advisory services even if the original request for support omits it (e.g. through the inclusion of the gender specialists in the responses, practising joint country missions.) etc. All Team leaders should share the responsibility and be hold accountable for integrating gender in the work of their teams. To facilitate this process, an establishment of a Gender Steering group with representatives from all programme clusters chaired by senior management can be considered. In the current context where donor support for women’s targeted projects focus mainly on UN Women, UNDP needs to position itself more strongly as a gender mainstreaming agency that promotes gender equality and invests in women’s empowerment across all development interventions (including emphasizing the role of women in the context of growing demand for conflict prevention and peacebuilding).

Management Response: [Added: 2016/08/12] [Last Updated: 2016/08/18]

UNDP accepts this recommendation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
3.1. Reestablish Gender Community of Practitioners and capacitate COs with new / existing policies and mechanisms for gender mainstreaming
[Added: 2016/08/18]
Gender Equality Team 2016/04 Completed
3.2. Ensure integration of gender equality approaches at all stages of project cycle in the SOP on regional programme management
[Added: 2016/08/18]
Senior Programme Coordinator, RBM Specialist, Gender Specialist 2016/06 Completed
4. Recommendation:

Recommendation 4: In relation to conflict prevention, continue to institute measures that will strengthen the sustainability of the current support, including those initiatives under the UNDP/DPA Joint Program (JP). In particular, in relation to the JP, redouble efforts to enhance local and national capacities for conflict prevention, including through deeper civil society partnerships. Use the JP architecture to further the RP portfolio in conflict prevention and preventing violent extremism (PVE), ensuring closer links to UNDP CO work and investing more in action-orientated analysis.

Management Response: [Added: 2016/08/12] [Last Updated: 2016/08/18]

UNDP accepts this recommendation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
4.1. Continue partnership with DPA under the joint programme implementation, joint retreats and other meetings for an internal, frank and strategic exchange on conflict prevention and peacebuilding in the ECIS region
[Added: 2016/08/18]
Regional Conflict Prevention Specialist, GPB Team Leader No due date Initiated The action is ongoing without any due date
4.2. Develop an updated -Delivering in Situations of Protracted Conflict- paper that includes the best practices from development programmes and projects operating in conditions of protracted conflict or political complexity in the region within the UNDP/DPA Joint Program (JP) as one of the means to enhance the local and national capacities for conflict prevention.
[Added: 2016/08/18] [Last Updated: 2016/12/19]
Regional Conflict Prevention Specialist, GPB Team Leader 2016/12 Completed A 2016 update of the “Protracted Conflicts Paper” was completed, the 2016 paper served as the premise for a regional Concept Note submitted to the EU in June 2016 History
4.3. Explore various options to maintain PDA system and PDAs under the current financial constraints
[Added: 2016/08/18] [Last Updated: 2016/11/24]
Regional Conflict Prevention Specialist, GPB Team Leader 2016/10 Completed Sustainable Criticality assessment conducted in six countries, dialogues with RCs conducted, six PDA posts remain in the region. Regional PDA: the deployment of a DPA Political Affairs Officer to IRH being considered. History
5. Recommendation:

Recommendation 5: Continue and expand the use of the Catalytic Facility (experimenting with using some funding for cultivating demand among the COs for selected strategic agenda items) using less demanding application and reporting procedures. Create “invited” spaces for the COs for highly relevant initiatives related to promoting sensitive agenda or cultivating demand for certain issues (e.g. gender equality) targeting less involved countries, but exercise care: only when there is a strong indication that these funds can be used as seed funding initiating project developments IRH funding from the Catalytic Facility could be allocated based on discussions with COs rather than using competition format.

Management Response: [Added: 2016/08/12] [Last Updated: 2016/08/18]

UNDP accepts this recommendation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
5.1. Revise the overall procedure for the Catalytic and Scaling Up Facility to simplify the application and reporting process and strengthen linkages with regional priorities for better impact
[Added: 2016/08/18]
IRH Manager, Senior Programme Coordinator, Team Leaders 2016/06 Completed
6. Recommendation:

Recommendation 6: In the context of further mainstreaming of innovation, ensure that all the levels at the COs are involved and are enthusiastic about testing new ideas. Build upon the current successful examples in sharing the partnership building and innovations experience with other regions moving towards developing it as a service line by the IRH. It should be insured that the higher management level of the COs, who, by the nature of their work might be more inclined to act safe and avoid extra inputs of resources where there is a possibility of failure (hence also the need to encourage the “allowance to fail” culture) are involved in and share the move to innovation led programming. There is also a need to build in clear incentives for both management and staff to engage with innovation activities in an effort to move from experimentation to mainstreaming and having innovation clearly integrated in day to day programming.

Management Response: [Added: 2016/08/12] [Last Updated: 2016/08/18]

UNDP accepts this recommendation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
6.1. Develop and pilot a toolkit to induce innovation in business processes within POPP
[Added: 2016/08/18] [Last Updated: 2016/12/19]
K&I Specialist, IRH Manager, Senior Programme Coordinator 2016/12 Completed A toolkit (Project cycle hacker’s kit) was designed and launched in October. Evidence at the moment includes a blog post. It is planned that in 2017 IRH will design and deliver trainings using the toolkit for 8-10 COs in ECIS region and 4-5 COs outside of ECIS and on the application of data-innovation toolkit (developed with UN Global Pulse, and currently being refined within IRH). Link to blog post: http://www.nesta.org.uk/blog/innovation-undp-weekend-sport-daily-practice History
6.2. Work with other regions on promoting innovative approaches (e.g. crowdsourcing, blockchain, social impact investment, micronarratives)
[Added: 2016/08/18]
K&I Specialist No due date Initiated The action is ongoing without any due date.
6.3. Conduct a global event on exploring practical ways of inducing innovation in everyday business of UNDP
[Added: 2016/08/18] [Last Updated: 2016/11/24]
K&I Specialist, IRH Manager, Senior Programme Coordinator 2016/10 Completed Global event - Istanbul Innovation Days, organized by RBEC and BPPS took place between 17-19 October bringing country offices from different regions and to discuss recent developments. UNDP partnered with Nesta to develop a product that that will enable UNDP offices to embed innovation in project management business processes - the Project Cycle Hackers’ Toolkit (http://www.nesta.org.uk/blog/innovation-undp-weekend-sport-daily-practice) History
7. Recommendation:

Recommendation 7: In designing regional projects, it is important to pay specific attention to the factors that will enhance the regional value added and align the design elements accordingly; where justified pass on to the COs the management of the country specific components in full. In particular, it is important to focus (and not spread too thin), allow for flexibility (e.g. use only a few and most useful indicators), and enable capturing regional lessons through design (e.g. have some common elements). Involving CO professional staff in the design of the regional projects (below RR and DRR level) to boost COs’ ownership of the regional projects.

Management Response: [Added: 2016/08/12] [Last Updated: 2016/08/18]

UNDP accepts this recommendation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
7.1. Reinforce regional value and CO ownership of regional projects through the launch of SOP on regional project management
[Added: 2016/08/18]
QA and Coordination Team 2016/06 Completed
7.2. Introduce pre-PACs to ensure that each regional project idea is being widely discussed and regional value added is well defined.
[Added: 2016/08/18]
QA and Coordination Team 2016/06 Completed
8. Recommendation:

Recommendation 8: More systematically analyze the work and achievements of the COs related to each area of service of the IRH and promote sharing. Adopt a more consolidated approach in relation to the support of specific countries. Jointly with the COs and based on the systematic analysis of the portfolios of the COs identify the best practices to share (for all the service lines of the IRH) and facilitate experience sharing among the COs (including via efficient use of the Knowledge Gate). Use more the expertise available at the COs (CO staff) to share best practices. Ensure that there is a better coordination among the IRH teams in supporting given countries as well as more coordination/consultation with the COs during the design of regional projects and initiatives.

Management Response: [Added: 2016/08/12] [Last Updated: 2016/08/18]

UNDP accepts this recommendation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
8.1. Enhance Communities of Practitioners as a mechanism to analyze and share CO knowledge, achievements and lessons learned
[Added: 2016/08/18]
IRH Manager, Team Leaders No due date Initiated The action is ongoing without any due date
8.2. Utilize Yammer to share CO good practices and knowledge
[Added: 2016/08/18]
IRH Manager, IRH Teams No due date Initiated The action is ongoing without any due date
8.3. Solicit contributions from COs through blogs, stories and regional thematic newsletters.
[Added: 2016/08/18]
Communications Team, IRH Teams No due date Initiated The action is ongoing without any due date
9. Recommendation:

Recommendation 9: Take a clear stand on aligning available resources with the RP priorities and pilot the introduction of cost recovery models for service provision, but without losing the perspective of the important analytical work for which there might not be “paying” demand immediately. The scale of the resource base should be aligned with the scale of the expectations from the RP better. In the context of the “demand-driven” orientation in service provision and a general reluctance among donors to fund noncountry specific initiatives, the introduction of cost-recovery mechanisms, at least to some extent may be unavoidable. The IRH should look at the experience of other regional offices (e.g. in the Pacific) and pilot the new scheme starting with the services that are in most demand (e.g. programming support linked to resource mobilization). In this context it is also advised to analyse closer the trends in the service tracker with the areas of low demand but high relevance. While the introduction of cost-recovery mechanisms, at least to some extent may be unavoidable, it is important to preserve the space for the analytical work, which might not be “payable” immediately, as well as ensuring that the capacity of the IRH as providers of expertise is maintained and built upon.

Management Response: [Added: 2016/08/12] [Last Updated: 2016/08/18]

UNDP accepts this recommendation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
9.1. Carry out a series of information sharing capacity building activities with regard to using COSMOS and introduction of direct project costing (e.g. webinars, face-to-face, clinics, coaching and etc.)
[Added: 2016/08/18]
QA and Coordination Team, CO Support Team 2016/12 Completed
10. Recommendation:

Recommendation 10: Minimise the impact of understaffing of the teams on prospective/ important areas of the IRH work. While it is clear that the freeze on future hiring is unlikely to ease soon, there are a few areas where the demand is going to grow rapidly (e.g. SDGs, LED, NRM, AC) and the current staffing will not suffice. In particular, while it is clear that a lot of the work related to SDGs will be done by thematic teams, there is a need to have a dedicated person to coordinate analysis as well as cover the work on the HDRs. The staffing needs/adjustments need to be kept under focus continuously and reasonable solutions found to meet the most urgent needs. The scheme of buying staff time from the COs is an innovative idea but needs to be streamlined to avoid putting excess workload on this staff. This is likely to require more time to be spent by this staff at the IRH and increasing the share of time dedicated to the IRH (perhaps 50 percent).

Management Response: [Added: 2016/08/12] [Last Updated: 2016/08/18]

UNDP accepts this recommendation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
10.1 Further promote and implement the CO capacities sharing scheme (detail assignment, cost-sharing % of CO staff time, etc.)
[Added: 2016/08/18]
IRH Manager, Team Leaders No due date Initiated The action is ongoing without any due date

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

220 East 42nd Street
20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org