- Evaluation Plan:
- 2012-2016, South Sudan
- Evaluation Type:
- Outcome
- Planned End Date:
- 08/2015
- Completion Date:
- 08/2015
- Status:
- Completed
- Management Response:
- Yes
- Evaluation Budget(US $):
- 100,000
South Sudan Recovery Fund Round 3: UN Joint Stabilization Programmes Outcome Evaluation
| Document | Type | Language | Size | Status | Downloads |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 SSRF outcome evaluation TOR_FINAL.pdf |
tor | English | 521.88 KB | Posted | 276 |
| SSRF OUTCOME EVALUATION REPORT.pdf |
report | English | 1805.09 KB | Posted | 673 |
| Title | South Sudan Recovery Fund Round 3: UN Joint Stabilization Programmes Outcome Evaluation | ||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atlas Project Number: | 00064379 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Plan: | 2012-2016, South Sudan | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Type: | Outcome | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Status: | Completed | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Completion Date: | 08/2015 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Planned End Date: | 08/2015 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Management Response: | Yes | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Focus Area: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017) |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| SDG Goal |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| SDG Target |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Budget(US $): | 100,000 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Source of Funding: | SSRF | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Joint Programme: | No | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Joint Evaluation: | No | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Team members: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| GEF Evaluation: | No | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Key Stakeholders: | UNOPS, WFP, NGO ACTED | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Countries: | SOUTH SUDAN |
| Lessons | |
|---|---|
| Findings |
| Recommendations | |
|---|---|
| 1 | In order to ?consolidate the existing benefits of SSRF round 3? in support of the intended outcome ?to Increase security and reduce the levels of ethnic conflict ?, SSRF could consider support for a community capacity building programme for maintenance and repair of boreholes and haffirs built through the UN Joint Stabilization Programmes in Lakes, Eastern Equatoria and Warrap States. The form and modality of financing and implementation could be through a different entity, but it would ensure that the SSRF financed assets continued to contribute to the reduction of ethnic conflict linked to competition for water resources. As these assets were transferred to Community Level Water Management Committees (when they existed), it should be a continuing obligation of the SSRF to provide technical support and capacity development, recognizing that the state and county institutions have limited capacities in the current context. Such an initiative, could also include haffirs or boreholes constructed through other organizations. |
| 2 | SSRF supported road works in use in Eastern Equatoria, Warrap and Lakes States, could be included in possible labour-based road maintenance programmes carried out by other organizations, so that the assets are not lost. SSRF resources could be used to support such initiatives and cover at least a three year period. An intervention such as this would improve general capacity to maintain roads other than those created under the SSRF. |
| 3 | SSRF donors and partners should continue the dialogue on how to move forward in future programmes in support of South Sudan?s stabilization and recovery, as the needs are ever more pressing. Existing SSRF supported assets and investments must be preserved, where possible, while future initiatives are planned and developed. |
1. Recommendation: In order to ?consolidate the existing benefits of SSRF round 3? in support of the intended outcome ?to Increase security and reduce the levels of ethnic conflict ?, SSRF could consider support for a community capacity building programme for maintenance and repair of boreholes and haffirs built through the UN Joint Stabilization Programmes in Lakes, Eastern Equatoria and Warrap States. The form and modality of financing and implementation could be through a different entity, but it would ensure that the SSRF financed assets continued to contribute to the reduction of ethnic conflict linked to competition for water resources. As these assets were transferred to Community Level Water Management Committees (when they existed), it should be a continuing obligation of the SSRF to provide technical support and capacity development, recognizing that the state and county institutions have limited capacities in the current context. Such an initiative, could also include haffirs or boreholes constructed through other organizations.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/11]
The Expert Reference Group (ERG) agrees with the recommendation to consolidate the benefits of existing SSRF support for boreholes and haffirs, and proposes that the SRF launches a dedicated programme in response to this. This should have high priority and be considered by the new SRF Board on an urgent basis. Based on the available evidence, sustainability of boreholes and haffirs will be important to increase security and reduce water-based conflict, and on-going support for community capacity building in the form of technical support and capacity development will be critical in this regard. Sustainability of boreholes and haffirs constructed under other programmes, for instance the UN Peace Building Fund, could also be supported through this initiative.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UNDP considering the recommendation in it new programming.
[Added: 2015/12/11] [Last Updated: 2018/08/22] |
UNDP Senior Management | 2017/12 | Completed | A project document submitted to Germany for instrastructural development picks on the lessons learned from the SSRF haffirs and borehole provision History |
2. Recommendation: SSRF supported road works in use in Eastern Equatoria, Warrap and Lakes States, could be included in possible labour-based road maintenance programmes carried out by other organizations, so that the assets are not lost. SSRF resources could be used to support such initiatives and cover at least a three year period. An intervention such as this would improve general capacity to maintain roads other than those created under the SSRF.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/11]
The ERG agrees with the recommendation to benefit from the SSRF road building projects, and recommends that the new SRF Board considers the potential to launch labour intensive road maintenance work around roads already constructed by the SSRF on an urgent basis and along similar lines as with capacity building for haffirs and boreholes mentioned above. Labour intensive road maintenance programmes will provide important peace dividends and can facilitate reintegration of IDPs and ex-combatants.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The recommendation refers to the donors and SSRF is closing by 31 December 2015. However, UNDP could consider the recommendation and coordinate with donors in future planning and decision making exercises.
[Added: 2015/12/11] [Last Updated: 2018/08/22] |
UNDP Senior Management | 2017/12 | Completed | Community development projects implemented by UNDP beyond 2015 have emphasized utilisation of local labour force to provide jobs and incomes to the predominantly youthful population History |
3. Recommendation: SSRF donors and partners should continue the dialogue on how to move forward in future programmes in support of South Sudan?s stabilization and recovery, as the needs are ever more pressing. Existing SSRF supported assets and investments must be preserved, where possible, while future initiatives are planned and developed.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/11]
3. The ERG supports the proposals to use existing SSRF assets and investments as a basis for going forward, and it recommends that SSRF programme reports and other relevant SSRF documentation, including the evaluation, are presented to the SRF Board for consideration and discussion on an urgent basis.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The recommendation refers to the donors and SSRF is closing by 31 December 2015. However, UNDP could consider the recommendation and coordinate with donors in future planning and decision making exercises.
[Added: 2015/12/11] [Last Updated: 2018/08/22] |
UNDP senior management | 2016/12 | Completed | SSRF evaluation report presented to the steering committee. Recommendations were well noted. Assets that were salvaged were handed over to relevant institutions for use. History |