- Evaluation Plan:
- 2014-2017, Independent Evaluation Office
- Evaluation Type:
- Planned End Date:
- Completion Date:
- Management Response:
- Evaluation Budget(US $):
Evaluation of Institutional Effectiveness
|Assessment of Institutional Effectiveness.pdf||report||English||2530.06 KB||Posted||171|
|Terms of Reference.pdf||tor||English||169.27 KB||Posted||27|
|Title||Evaluation of Institutional Effectiveness|
|Atlas Project Number:|
|Evaluation Plan:||2014-2017, Independent Evaluation Office|
|Planned End Date:||08/2017|
|Corporate Outcomes (UNDP Strategic Plan 2008-20013)|
|Evaluation Budget(US $):||150,000|
|Source of Funding:|
|Joint Evaluation:|| Yes
|Evaluation Team members:||
Based on the content of the UNDAF and the guidance provided in the UNDP quality standards, country offices should ensure that the UNDP comparative advantage and value added are adequately identified by providing evidence as to why UNDP is better positioned than other institutions to implement a specific programme.
UNDP should ensure that all country offices fully understand and adequatelypractise the concept of theory of change during the programming process through a thorough assessment of the completeness and internal logic of the theory of change prior to submitting the CPDs to the Executive Board.
UNDP should assess the costs of implementing the new programme and project quality assurance system to determine whether and, if so, how the resource requirements of the reformed system can be sustainably met with costed plans for a phased implementation. Based on the budget available, UNDP should prioritize the quality elements to which country offices have to adhere fully.
UNDP should reassess the financial sustainability of the regional service centres/hubs model including the posting of the BPPS policy advisers.
UNDP should develop greater RBM expertise with improved focus on learning and knowledge management for enhanced effectiveness, shifting the focus from proving results to improving results. To effectively institutionalize RBM, capacity development needs to be delivered through a broad range of approaches and include all staff, from leadership and senior management to programme managers and associates. Capacity development should also extend to implementing partners, whose engagement is essential if national data sets are to improve and contribute to UNDP reporting requirements. Increased attention should also be given to promoting an organizational culture that uses more effectively the conclusions, recommendations and lessons learned from evaluations and audits to contribute to knowledge management and to feed strategic and timely decision-making.
|6||UNDP leadership should prioritize investment in knowledge management, going beyond capturing best practices to using lessons learned from each context of success and failure to contribute to effectiveness and improve results. The role of leadership is pivotal in ensuring an enabling environment and support for UNDP to enhance engagement and communication to further develop a results-based culture throughout the organization that welcomes critical reflection on performance and effective knowledge management to improve results, where successes but also failures are important vehicles of learning. Leadership should effectively encourage a “results culture” which goes beyond reporting and understands RBM in terms of continuous organizational self-learning from both successes and failure and from innovation, and not just M&E for reporting purposes.|