Outcome Evaluation of Climate Change and Environment (CCE) Portfolio

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2016-2020, Turkey
Evaluation Type:
Outcome
Planned End Date:
01/2019
Completion Date:
02/2019
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
25,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document TOR for OutcomeEvalution of CCE Portfolio.pdf tor English 919.32 KB Posted 176
Download document CCE Portfolio Outcome Evaluation 2016-2020 - Final.pdf report English 1989.99 KB Posted 418
Title Outcome Evaluation of Climate Change and Environment (CCE) Portfolio
Atlas Project Number: 00061845,00056563,00082077,00081796,00096470
Evaluation Plan: 2016-2020, Turkey
Evaluation Type: Outcome
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 02/2019
Planned End Date: 01/2019
Management Response: Yes
UNDP Signature Solution:
  • 1. Poverty
  • 2. Sustainable
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
  • 1. Output 1.1.1 Capacities developed across the whole of government to integrate the 2030 Agenda, the Paris Agreement and other international agreements in development plans and budgets, and to analyse progress towards the SDGs, using innovative and data-driven solutions
  • 2. Output 1.4.1 Solutions scaled up for sustainable management of natural resources, including sustainable commodities and green and inclusive value chains
  • 3. Output 2.1.1 Low emission and climate resilient objectives addressed in national, sub-national and sectoral development plans and policies to promote economic diversification and green growth
  • 4. Output 2.3.1 Data and risk-informed development policies, plans, systems and financing incorporate integrated and gender-responsive solutions to reduce disaster risks, enable climate change adaptation and mitigation, and prevent risk of conflict
  • 5. Output 2.4.1 Gender-responsive legal and regulatory frameworks, policies and institutions strengthened, and solutions adopted, to address conservation, sustainable use and equitable benefit sharing of natural resources, in line with international conventions and national legislation
  • 6. Output 2.5.1 Solutions developed, financed and applied at scale for energy efficiency and transformation to clean energy and zero-carbon development, for poverty eradication and structural transformation
SDG Goal
  • Goal 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
  • Goal 14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development
  • Goal 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages
  • Goal 9. Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation
SDG Target
  • 12.4 By 2020, achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle, in accordance with agreed international frameworks, and significantly reduce their release to air, water and soil in order to minimize their adverse impacts on human health and the environment
  • 14.5 By 2020, conserve at least 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, consistent with national and international law and based on the best available scientific information
  • 3.9 By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination
  • 9.4 By 2030, upgrade infrastructure and retrofit industries to make them sustainable, with increased resource-use efficiency and greater adoption of clean and environmentally sound technologies and industrial processes, with all countries taking action in accordance with their respective capabilities
Evaluation Budget(US $): 25,000
Source of Funding: Budgets of projects under the CCE Portfolio
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 20,000
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Suha Satana Economist, Phd suhasatana@gmail.com TURKEY
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders:
Countries: TURKEY
Lessons
Findings
1.

Documentation: Review of available documents and M&E reports at the CCE level revealed that there is sufficient information to ascertain the status of the outcomes at the project level, from which some inferences can be made to higher level outcome analysis. Review of the UNDCS and UNDP CPD results framework led to further clarity, but the two documents were not fully aligned in content and format, but it was noticed that both UNDCS and UNDP CPD were geared more toward project level assessment than portfolio outcome analysis. The same issue was flagged in the previous Outcome Evaluation of 2013.


Tag: Challenges Effectiveness Monitoring and Evaluation Project and Programme management

2.

Mitigation Strategy Adopted: A reconfigured CCE Results Framework was attempted, but it could not be fully completed. Further document review, interviews within UNDP and partners have bridged the gap for information, and enabled the completion on this evaluation.


Tag: Climate change governance Monitoring and Evaluation Results-Based Management

3.

Since the 2016 failed coup, the political situation in Turkey has improved for the most part, but the state of emergency, which was imposed in response to the failed coup, was extended seven times (until July 2018) before it was lifted. As a result of the referendum in April 2017, the parliamentary system of government was replaced with an executive presidency in June 2018, and the changes brought by the Constitutional Amendment entered into force. The developments following the Referendum have escalated social and political tensions and have contributed to delays in economic reform efforts, thereby hampering the economy, and negatively affecting the country's relations with the EU. On the economic front, government-led extensive stimulus packages helped sustained economic growth and employment in 2017, but the inflation rate climbed again to double-digit levels after 6 years, and now stands at 25%, with steep hikes in the exchange rates. Changes in the functioning and structure of the State institutions have affected the working environment for UNDP Projects.


Tag: Challenges Effectiveness Parliament Country Government Conflict

4.

The UNDP Front: In addition to sound program design and scope, it is observed that the CCE already runs a cost-conscious operation, and functions at a reasonable cost with minimum essential staff. All resident staff is high caliber nationals, which adds to their value in terms of being able to work in their own language with the counterparts and hence become more effective as technical partners, as well as help ward off such costs as international travel and accommodations etc. UNDP in many cases also capitalizes on its core asset of being a neutral agency and honest broker with a very positive public image. The fact that most CCE projects involve grants funds rather than loans/credits to the government is another facet that reinforces this image. An impressive amount of co-financing has been pledged by the partners, especially the private sector. A good part is of the pledged co-financing is being realized and sometimes exceeded significantly (the IEEI project case). This is a clear sign of institutional efficiency as well as operational effectiveness. Embedded staff within the partners lends further credibility and trust to UNDP CCE (PEEMS and Chemicals are cases in point). Firm control over the funds and judicious procurement (albeit sometimes slow enough to incite discontent with the partners), and the ability to network and maintain the key connections are additional key features underlying the CCE efficiency. Finally, adaptable project design lending itself to built-in replication capability characterizes almost all projects (POPS, PEEMS and SFM) is a very desirable feature to note.


Tag: Efficiency Sustainability Government Cost-sharing Private Sector Financing Human and Financial resources Country Government Private Sector UNDP Management UNDP management

5.

Principal findings of the evaluation concern the high level of progress in the gender mainstreaming dimension, very high level of co-financing achieved, balanced and rich portfolio valued at about US$ 300, including co-financing, and a narrower scope (as opposed to ESD era), while sharpening focus on key areas. Minor problems were also noted by the evaluation which usually referred to process and procedure (such as procurement delays) rather than essence.


Tag: Effectiveness Gender Mainstreaming Project and Programme management

6.

Certain CCE weaknesses should also be noted. Despite continued efforts, the promised financial mechanism intended to serve the SMEs via the EE interventions has not yet been established, and remains a pending matter. It is hoped that progress made under PEEMS will make a difference in this respect. The ORKOY project has finally been resurrected, but it was close to being announced otherwise. Its main deficiency was insufficient design to guide the implementation teams, as well as being highly unfortunate and running into a myriad of implementation hurdles. The disaster management focus is still awaiting its specific intervention. Finally, the design of implementation of regional projects risks alienating the Ministry staff in Ankara, as was the case in SFM. More attention with inclusive design and implementation engagement would be warranted for such cases.


Tag: Challenges Effectiveness Programme/Project Design Project and Programme management

7.

The Partners Front: Despite adversities, all partners fared very well. All projects are on track. Those which have been granted extensions (POPS and SFM) are out of the control of all concerned, for the most part. Once can access and read the Biennial Reports and National Communications reports on the web, and cannot help being impressed. An impressive volume of reports were produced, including contributions to the so-called Progress Implementation Reports. Their enhancement of capacity and motivation is quite visible. All partners are keen to continue with UNDP and they appreciate the extent and quality of the support.


Tag: Sustainability Partnership

8.

CCE Portfolio management implemented a good coordination mechanism, with frequent consultations with the concerned ministries: MoEU, MFA, and MENR. The CCE partnership strategy has involved a diverse array of partners from the national, regional and local Governments, academia, NGOs, the private sector and the civil society. In addition to the above cited key ministries the CCE teams have been working with: Chamber of Forest Engineers; Yale University; Union of Forest Cooperatives; Nature Conservation Centre; WWF–Turkey; Climate Change and Air Management Board; AFAD; EU Delegation; Gold Standard; GUNDER, Private Sector (Coca Cola, MERKIM, KARDEMIR, ISDEMIR, Bedas, Etimaden, Igsas, Sedas, Turk Sugar Factories, Merkim); and Industry Associations. Through the GEF funded projects the CCE has forged good partnerships with other UN agencies, particularly with UNIDO, UNEP and FAO. This strategy has allowed the CCE address budget constraints by brokering and establishing strong partnership with the Turkish Government and the private sector, as indicated above.


Tag: Effectiveness Global Environment Facility fund Multilateral Partners Partnership Project and Programme management Civil Societies and NGOs Country Government Private Sector UN Agencies Coordination

Recommendations
1

When technically possible, update the design and RF if more than two years have elapsed after preparation before the project becomes effective

2

Introduce detailed costings and prepare joint budgets to be implemented as parallel co financing.

 

3

Explore ways and means of doing joint co-financing as opposed to parallel co-financing.

 

4

Introduce some economic feasibility analysis in the designs, and link it with the Results Framework.

5

Consider making the main report part of the Project Documents smaller in size, while expanding their annexes.

6

Try to stay away from quantitative targets unless well justified and warranted.

7

Always bear in mind that UNDP’s key role is to trigger change.

8

Utilize the Theory of Change intensively and do not take chances on the Result Framework Preparation

9

Continue with the efforts to mainstream gender equality across the entire portfolio, and start firmly with the designs.

10

Incorporate the concept of resilience in the CCE strategy and action by ensuring that relevant project designs include multi-hazard risk assessments, taking into account seismic and climatic risks and others if deemed necessary and providing estimates of the potential impact on project staff, partners, beneficiaries and project activities

11

Embedded project staff at implementing partners is key to sustained partner cooperation. Try to spread this practice with all FSPs.

12

Detailed multi-year joint (integrated) budgets can enhance ownership and increase accountability with implementing partners. Give it a try despite difficulties

13

Try to closely monitor co-financing to the extent politically and technically feasible.

14

Remain alert and evaluation-ready at all times. Do not wait for 5 years till the next OE

15

Establish a central system (or re-model the existing system) with satellite sub-systems based at large projects with one PMU per cluster (or focus area) if and when possible.

 

16

Do system automation, and produce reports on demand by database queries.

17

Prepare semi-annual summaries for the portfolio, and annual impact reports using the incoming reports to the system, mainly the PIRs.

18

Disclose M&E Reports on the WEB

19

Adopt co-financing ratio as a distinct performance indicator and monitor it closely.

20

Use co-financing amounts and ratios as indicator for efficiency and sustainability.

21

Help establish a program/portfolio M&E based on a re-configured Portfolio Results Framework and GEF principles using external consultants

22

Bring gender within the purview of M&E and insist on disaggregated data where disaggregated data makes sense.

23

Harmonize strategy documents across UNDCS, UNDP CDS and portfolio level results framework, and craft a CCE Results Framework flexible enough to withstand changes brought about by the flux of projects, and hard enough to remain in force for a long time.

1. Recommendation:

When technically possible, update the design and RF if more than two years have elapsed after preparation before the project becomes effective

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

The design of the projects are revised and updated during the PPG phases of the projects. If the donor is different than GEF project inception phases are going to use for the necessary revisions and updates.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
The design and the RF will be updated if more than two years have elapsed before the project officially starts.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
Portfolio Manager and related Cluster Leads 2020/12 Completed The design and the RF of the projects are revised and updated during the inception phase. Additionally if a Mid-term evaluation is required for projects and if there are changes in external circumstances that would affect Theory of Change, RFs are also revised by consultants in consultation with project teams' approval. History
2. Recommendation:

Introduce detailed costings and prepare joint budgets to be implemented as parallel co financing.

 

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Preparing joint budgets requires corporate decision. If any new rules and regulations will be introduced at the POPP regarding this matter it will be adopted directly to the project management.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
Portfolio Manager and related Cluster Leads. 2020/12 Completed During the project preparation and design stage, a joint budget is preparing which includes the co-financing. However we keep consistency within POPP rules and regulations. History
3. Recommendation:

Explore ways and means of doing joint co-financing as opposed to parallel co-financing.

 

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Preparing joint budgets requires corporate decision. If any new rules and regulations will be introduced at the POPP regarding this matter it will be adopted directly to the project management.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
Portfolio Manager and related Cluster Leads. 2020/09 Completed We follow rules and regulations of UNDP, vertical funds and other donors to explore ways and means of joint co-financing. We include joint co-financing approach during the project design phase. History
4. Recommendation:

Introduce some economic feasibility analysis in the designs, and link it with the Results Framework.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Economic feasibility analysis to be introduced in the designs of the projects. Also, the analysis will be linked to the Results Framework.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
Portfolio Manager and related Cluster Leads. 2020/09 Completed Economic feasibility analysis enhanced in the design of the projects History
5. Recommendation:

Consider making the main report part of the Project Documents smaller in size, while expanding their annexes.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Further clarifications and new format for Project Documents will be explored.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
Portfolio Manager and related UNDP staff. 2020/09 Completed Project document formats are regularly updated by the HQ and introduced to COs. Additionally UNDP Turkey Quality Assurance Unit also amends and revises both ProDoc and Progress Report formats at CO from a quality perspective. History
6. Recommendation:

Try to stay away from quantitative targets unless well justified and warranted.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Both well justified quantitative and qualitative targets will be justified and warranted through a set of SMART indicators during the design of the projects in line with the M&E system of the portfolio.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
Portfolio Manager, related Cluster Leads and M&E Advisor. 2020/09 Completed It is in CCE's best interest to quantify indicators if there are justifiable grounds for doing so such as demonstrating environmental and community benefits in a robust and un-contestable manner. During the design of the projects SMART indicators are being included in the RRF of the projects (both quantitative and qualitative) which are in line with the M&E system of the portfolio and RBM rules of UNDP. History
7. Recommendation:

Always bear in mind that UNDP’s key role is to trigger change.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Following the building and adoption of a CCE Portfolio Level Results Framework, relevant indicators to track these changes would be developed and existing ones sharpened.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
Portfolio Manager, related Cluster Leads and M&E Advisor. 2020/04 Completed New indicators to track change were identified and linked with the new CPD which will be in use starting January 2021. History
8. Recommendation:

Utilize the Theory of Change intensively and do not take chances on the Result Framework Preparation

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Results Framework specific for the CCE Portfolio will be prepared collaboratively in line with the CPD and SDG targets of the portfolio considering to utilize the theory of change.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
Portfolio Manager, related Cluster Leads and M&E Advisor. 2020/04 Completed Proper input related to CCE portfolio prepared and submitted during the preparations of the new CPD. History
9. Recommendation:

Continue with the efforts to mainstream gender equality across the entire portfolio, and start firmly with the designs.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Human capacity of projects and portfolio for gender mainstreaming will be enriched via hiring experts for relevant projects. In 2018, a need analysis finalized and hiring relevant experts will be in place in 2019.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
Portfolio Manager 2020/09 Completed During project design and implementation process we accomodate gender expertise. Gender equality will be closely monitor and then evaluated with UNDP corporate tools. Additionally UNDP CO has a full time dedicated Gender Analyst since June 2020 that will closely screen projects' gender commitments and ensure adoption of a gender perspective during design stage in collaboration with Quality Assurance Unit History
10. Recommendation:

Incorporate the concept of resilience in the CCE strategy and action by ensuring that relevant project designs include multi-hazard risk assessments, taking into account seismic and climatic risks and others if deemed necessary and providing estimates of the potential impact on project staff, partners, beneficiaries and project activities

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Once the strategy is decided on how to incorporate the concept of resilience in the CCE portfolio, multi-hazard risk assessments, taking into account seismic and climatic risks and others will be included to the relevant project designs.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
Portfolio Manager and related Cluster Leads. 2020/09 Completed Draft CDP for 2021-2025 has been enhanced with a pillar on risk informed development in line with this recommendation and relevant project and tools have been developed. Additionally resilience dimension of the whole portfolio has been strengthened in the light of Covid and its adverse effects on communities and eco-systems especially with respect to medical waste through various Recovery Tools and trainings shared in the attachment. History
11. Recommendation:

Embedded project staff at implementing partners is key to sustained partner cooperation. Try to spread this practice with all FSPs.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Embedding dedicated project staff at implementing partners will tried to be spread as a common practice for the projects under the portfolio.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
Portfolio Manager 2020/09 Completed All projects have a project management unit which composed of dedicated project staff and implementing partner staff. However during the COVID-19 pandemic project management units keep close working arrangements with online tools with the implementing partner staff. History
12. Recommendation:

Detailed multi-year joint (integrated) budgets can enhance ownership and increase accountability with implementing partners. Give it a try despite difficulties

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Preparing joint budgets requires corporate decision. If any new rules and regulations will be introduced at the POPP regarding this matter it will be adopted directly to the project management.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
Portfolio Manager 2020/09 Completed Project implementation enhanced with detailed multi-year joint budget. All of the projects closely follow their joint budget and work plan at project level. We keep consistency with POPP rules and regulations. History
13. Recommendation:

Try to closely monitor co-financing to the extent politically and technically feasible.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
During the preparation of project progress reports, mid-term and terminal evaluation reports a co-finance table will be prepared in consultation with the partners of the project as a monitoring activity
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
Portfolio Manager, Cluster Leads and M&E Advisor 2020/09 Completed Project implementation enhanced with detailed multi-year joint budget. All of the projects closely follow their joint budget and work plan at project level. We keep consistency with POPP rules and regulations. In addition during Midterm and Terminal Evaluations co-finance tables prepared within consultation to implementing partner. History
14. Recommendation:

Remain alert and evaluation-ready at all times. Do not wait for 5 years till the next OE

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Within the scope of the M&E strategy of the portfolio it is already decided to conduct the outcome evaluations in 2024.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
Portfolio Manager and M&E Advisor 2020/09 Completed M&E strategy of the portfolio incorporating portfolio outcomes with project outputs have been improved and followed closely by dedicated M&E Advisor of the portfolio. In addition new CPD's Evaluation Plan entails an outcome evaluation in February 2024. Almost all GEF funded projects of the portfolio go through a mid-term and final evaluation. IPA funded projects also go through a final evaluation. In that sense the portfolio is evaluation-ready at all times. History
15. Recommendation:

Establish a central system (or re-model the existing system) with satellite sub-systems based at large projects with one PMU per cluster (or focus area) if and when possible.

 

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
For every cluster and the project under the portfolio the responsibility unit/staff for the M&E activities were introduced in line with the M&E strategy of the portfolio to increase the efficiency of the M&E activities.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
M&E Advisor 2020/09 Completed A central system established in line with corporate M&E requirements and improved with a clear responsibility within the CCE portfolio. History
16. Recommendation:

Do system automation, and produce reports on demand by database queries.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
More efficient and automated report formats will be explored and new methodologies will be introduced in order to increase effectiveness and efficiency of the portfolio.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
M&E Advisor 2020/09 Completed Efficient and automated report formats have been developed and introduced to project teams and shared within UNDP microsoft online tools. History
17. Recommendation:

Prepare semi-annual summaries for the portfolio, and annual impact reports using the incoming reports to the system, mainly the PIRs.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
All these reporting tools will be used to prepare annual summary for the portfolio and also impact assessment will be conducted to the portfolio.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
M&E Advisor 2020/09 Completed Efficient and automated tools prepared and shared with the portfolio teams directly feed the annual summary and impact assessment of the portfolio and this information used in corporate and donor required reports and monitoring tools. History
18. Recommendation:

Disclose M&E Reports on the WEB

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Further ways will be explored to disclose the M&E reports on the website of UNDP. In addition, a process for dissemination of M&E reports and gathering suggestions from key stakeholders will be explored.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
Portfolio Manager and M&E Advisor 2020/09 Completed Findings of the M&E reports of the portfolio have been included in the corporate M&E reports and feeding the annual report of UNDP and disclosed at UNDP website. In addition to this; M&E reports are available on the UNDP corporate website and donor websites. History
19. Recommendation:

Adopt co-financing ratio as a distinct performance indicator and monitor it closely.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Co-finance tables will be prepared within consultation to the partners of the projects as a monitoring activity and tools will be developed to monitor co-financing.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
Portfolio Manager and M&E Advisor 2020/09 Completed Portfolio level M&E tools include a specific tool to monitor co-financing. In addition; Terminal Evaluation of the projects considers co-financing as an important monitoring tool. History
20. Recommendation:

Use co-financing amounts and ratios as indicator for efficiency and sustainability.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Co-finance tables will be prepared within consultation to the partners of the projects as a monitoring activity and tools will be developed to monitor co-financing.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
Portfolio Manager and M&E Advisor 2020/09 Completed Portfolio level M&E tools include a specific tool to monitor co-financing. In addition Terminal Evaluation reports of the projects includes co-financing as an important monitoring tool and especially use them as an indicator for efficiency and sustainability. History
21. Recommendation:

Help establish a program/portfolio M&E based on a re-configured Portfolio Results Framework and GEF principles using external consultants

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Results Framework specific for the CCE Portfolio will be prepared collaboratively in line with the CPD and SDG targets of the portfolio.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
Portfolio Manager 2020/04 Completed RRF specific for CCE portfolio has been prepared and included in the new CPD of UNDP CO Turkey. History
22. Recommendation:

Bring gender within the purview of M&E and insist on disaggregated data where disaggregated data makes sense.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/02/18] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Sex-disaggregated data to be collected and analysis of male/female (M/F) differences to be included in all reports and assessments to clarify differences between M/F vulnerability will be done. In addition, in availability of sex- disaggregated data will be identified.
[Added: 2019/04/02] [Last Updated: 2020/09/03]
Portfolio Manager, Gender Advisor and M&E Advisor 2020/09 Completed LPAC checklists used to clear ProDocs specifically ask for sex-disaggregated data and gender screening as a mandatory exercise. Take a look at LPAC checklist attached for information purposes History
23. Recommendation:

Harmonize strategy documents across UNDCS, UNDP CDS and portfolio level results framework, and craft a CCE Results Framework flexible enough to withstand changes brought about by the flux of projects, and hard enough to remain in force for a long time.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/11/25] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]

Key Actions:

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

1 UN Plaza
DC1-20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org