Confidence Building through Cultural Protection in Kosovo

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2016-2020, Kosovo
Evaluation Type:
Final Project
Planned End Date:
07/2017
Completion Date:
05/2017
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
11,173

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document ToR.pdf tor English 568.23 KB Posted 123
Download document Final Evaluation Report CBTC Project.pdf report English 1223.54 KB Posted 300
Title Confidence Building through Cultural Protection in Kosovo
Atlas Project Number: 00089987 ,00095982
Evaluation Plan: 2016-2020, Kosovo
Evaluation Type: Final Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 05/2017
Planned End Date: 07/2017
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Democratic Governance
  • 2. Others
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017)
  • 1. Output 2.1. Parliaments, constitution making bodies and electoral institutions enabled to perform core functions for improved accountability, participation and representation, including for peaceful transitions
Evaluation Budget(US $): 11,173
Source of Funding: 10159 - EU COM
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 11,521
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders: EULEX, EUOK, Kosovo Police, EUSR, UNMIK, Ministry for Environment and Spatial Planning, Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sport/ Department of Cultural Heritage Protection
Countries: KOSOVO
Lessons
1.

Lessons learnt

  • The design phase should be done in line with corporate practice using the recommended PME and UNDG handbook tools and with people with previous subject matter experience
  • The project manager (PM) needs to be recruited before the start of the project and participate in the selection of the project team (project officers)
  • It is important to incorporate a proper budget line for the M&E function to be able to present credible evidence of results beyond the actual activities completed
  • The Project Board is a mechanism to help project management and should be used strategically as such
  • It is necessary, when dealing with concepts, to share the same vocabulary and terminology with all project stakeholders to avoid unfulfilled expectations

Good practice

The project also carried out several good practices that should be replicated:

  • Good and inclusive consultation process for the site selection
  • Establishing clear and transparent criteria (5) for the selection of sites
  • Extensive efforts to disseminate knowledge and raise awareness on CH through various means (workshops, media, schools, etc.)
  • Transparent process vis-à-vis the municipalities in terms of project information
  • Using the KP and the municipality as facilitators with religious communities
  • School awareness raising on CH amongst youth
  • Municipalities have now allocated budget lines for maintenance of public spaces such as cemeteries and parks
  • Attitudinal change evident amongst the key stakeholders in municipalities, with variations depending on the municipality
  • Impact of the religious leaders exchanging visits to their places of worship in public is sending a constructive message for cooperation and cohabitation
  • High visibility of the donor (EU) and each site has a plate linked to the project and the donor, as well as all materials produced under the project
  • Obtaining a commitment through a Joint Declaration is an initial step towards developing a formal network of project supporters throughout the municipalities

Good practice

The project also carried out several good practices that should be replicated:

  • Good and inclusive consultation process for the site selection
  • Establishing clear and transparent criteria (5) for the selection of sites
  • Extensive efforts to disseminate knowledge and raise awareness on CH through various means (workshops, media, schools, etc.)
  • Transparent process vis-à-vis the municipalities in terms of project information
  • Using the KP and the municipality as facilitators with religious communities
  • School awareness raising on CH amongst youth
  • Municipalities have now allocated budget lines for maintenance of public spaces such as cemeteries and parks
  • Attitudinal change evident amongst the key stakeholders in municipalities, with variations depending on the municipality
  • Impact of the religious leaders exchanging visits to their places of worship in public is sending a constructive message for cooperation and cohabitation
  • High visibility of the donor (EU) and each site has a plate linked to the project and the donor, as well as all materials produced under the project
  • Obtaining a commitment through a Joint Declaration is an initial step towards developing a formal network of project supporters throughout the municipalities

 


Findings
1.

Good practice:

  • Good and inclusive consultation process for the site selection
  • Establishing clear and transparent criteria (5) for the selection of sites
  • Extensive efforts to disseminate knowledge and raise awareness on CH through various means (workshops, media, schools, etc.)
  • Transparent process vis-à-vis the municipalities in terms of project information
  • Using the KP and the municipality as facilitators with religious communities
  • School awareness raising on CH amongst youth
  • Municipalities have now allocated budget lines for maintenance of public spaces such as cemeteries and parks
  • Attitudinal change evident amongst the key stakeholders in municipalities, with variations depending on the municipality
  • Impact of the religious leaders exchanging visits to their places of worship in public is sending a constructive message for cooperation and cohabitation
  • High visibility of the donor (EU) and each site has a plate linked to the project and the donor, as well as all materials produced under the project
  • Obtaining a commitment through a Joint Declaration is an initial step towards developing a formal network of project supporters throughout the municipalities

Recommendations
1

The time frame for project implementation should not be 12 months especially considering climate conditions – it should be extended to 18 months to ensure quality implementation of the works

2

A clearer strategy for achieving the project overall objective is needed. It is not clear at times whether the objective is confidence building or CH protection. A stronger theory of change based on a more developed project design is needed.

3

A monitoring plan and a proper M&E system is required for any project, in line with good PCM practice. There was no budget for anything except a final evaluation

4

UNDP should maintain in-house expertise of confidence building if they are to continue working in that field, as it is a long-term process.

5

Use more strategically the Project Board to pass messages and obtain support to address difficulties and shortcoming

6

UNDP should be able to communicate more clearly to stakeholders what is understood by “confidence building” to ensure all stakeholders use the same language with the same understanding and avoid creating expectations

7

Support to the extent possible the continuation of awareness raising on CH

8

The signatories of the Joint Declaration under the CBCPK project should be structured in a formal group, and made responsible for the small grants component of the next project, so ownership, commitment and responsibility should be vested with them.

9

There is a need to develop a full results framework based on some baseline data or informed research to be able to provide credible evidence of results

1. Recommendation:

The time frame for project implementation should not be 12 months especially considering climate conditions – it should be extended to 18 months to ensure quality implementation of the works

Management Response: [Added: 2017/09/14]

Management acknowledges the recommendation and the time frame for project implementation was extended to 18 months for the second phase of the project.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
A project proposal on Confidence Building through Cultural Heritage was submitted to the EU with an extended time-frame.
[Added: 2017/09/14]
Programme 2017/08 Completed History
2. Recommendation:

A clearer strategy for achieving the project overall objective is needed. It is not clear at times whether the objective is confidence building or CH protection. A stronger theory of change based on a more developed project design is needed.

Management Response: [Added: 2017/09/14]

Management acknowledges the recommendation and the link between the two is clearly established. The ToC was also developed to acknowledge the link between confidence building through cultural protection

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
The Theory of Change was strengthened for the second phase of the project
[Added: 2017/09/14] [Last Updated: 2017/12/19]
Programme Team 2017/11 Completed During design of the second phase the Theory of Change was strengthened History
3. Recommendation:

A monitoring plan and a proper M&E system is required for any project, in line with good PCM practice. There was no budget for anything except a final evaluation

Management Response: [Added: 2017/09/14]

Management acknowledges the recommendation and a budget line for monitoring and evaluation was included in the budget of the second phase of the project.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
A budget line for monitoring and evaluation was included in the new project proposal
[Added: 2017/09/14] [Last Updated: 2017/12/19]
Programme Team 2017/10 Completed for second phase of the project we added a budget line for monitoring and evaluation History
4. Recommendation:

UNDP should maintain in-house expertise of confidence building if they are to continue working in that field, as it is a long-term process.

Management Response: [Added: 2017/09/14]

Management takes note of the recommendation and will endeavour to maintain in-house expertise of confidence building.  

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
UNDP will endeavour to engage at least some of the formed project team members, in compliance with rules and regulations on recruitment and procurement
[Added: 2017/09/14] [Last Updated: 2017/12/19]
Programme Team 2017/11 Completed History
5. Recommendation:

Use more strategically the Project Board to pass messages and obtain support to address difficulties and shortcoming

Management Response: [Added: 2017/09/14]

Management takes note of the recommendation and will take the necessary steps to use the Project Board more strategically during the implementation of the second EU-funded project on Cultural Heritage. The project board will meet more often and the ToRs will be more detailed so that every member understands his/her role and the expected results of the meetings.   

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Drafting of the ToRs for the Project Board
[Added: 2017/09/14] [Last Updated: 2017/12/19]
Project Staff 2017/10 Completed The ToRs for the Project Board is drafted History
Increased frequency of project board meetings
[Added: 2017/09/14]
Project Staff 2019/12 Not Initiated
6. Recommendation:

UNDP should be able to communicate more clearly to stakeholders what is understood by “confidence building” to ensure all stakeholders use the same language with the same understanding and avoid creating expectations

Management Response: [Added: 2017/09/14] [Last Updated: 2017/09/14]

Management takes note of the recommendation. Regarding the second phase of the project, several consultations were held with different municipal officials, NGOs as well as religious leaders from pre-identified municipalities and religious sites of intervention to discuss the activities planned as well as the objective of the project, namely, confidence building, in order to ensure that all stakeholders have the same understanding of the purpose of the project. Once the project is approved, a meeting will be held again with the relevant stakeholders to discuss what is expected from them and from the project.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Consultations with municipal officials, NGOs and religious leaders from pre-identified municipalities and religious sites of intervention to discuss the activities planned and the objective of the project
[Added: 2017/09/14]
Programme Team 2017/08 Completed History
Meetings with relevant stakeholders (municipal officials, religious leaders, etc.) to discuss the interventions and the objective of the project
[Added: 2017/09/14] [Last Updated: 2017/12/19]
Project Staff 2017/12 Completed History
7. Recommendation:

Support to the extent possible the continuation of awareness raising on CH

Management Response: [Added: 2017/09/14]

Management acknowledges the recommendation. The continuation of awareness raising on Cultural Heritage will be done through the second EU-funded project on Cultural Heritage. The second output of the project focuses mainly on the promotion of cultural heritage through youth and community engagement. 

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Implementation of awareness raising activities on Cultural Heritage during the second phase of the project.
[Added: 2017/09/14]
Project Staff 2019/12 Initiated A project proposal on Cultural Heritage was submitted to the EU in August 2017. UNDP is currently awaiting for the EU’s final decision. The project, if approved, should start in October 2017. History
8. Recommendation:

The signatories of the Joint Declaration under the CBCPK project should be structured in a formal group, and made responsible for the small grants component of the next project, so ownership, commitment and responsibility should be vested with them.

Management Response: [Added: 2017/09/14]

Management takes note of the recommendation. The Joint Declaration under the CBCPK second face of the project will be structured in a formal group

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Initiate discussion with signatories of the Joint Declaration on the possibility of creating a structured group
[Added: 2017/09/14] [Last Updated: 2017/12/19]
Project Staff 2017/12 Completed The discussion with signatories of the Joint Declaration are Initiated History
9. Recommendation:

There is a need to develop a full results framework based on some baseline data or informed research to be able to provide credible evidence of results

Management Response: [Added: 2017/09/14]

Management takes note of the recommendation and has used the data generated during the first phase as a baseline for the drafting of the second one.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
A logical Matrix Framework, using data and information from the initial project, was developed
[Added: 2017/09/14]
Programme Team 2017/08 Completed

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