EVALUATION OF THE COUNTRY PROGRAMME OUTCOME 1.3 “Ecosystems and natural resources are protected and sustainably used, and human settlements are resilient to natural and human-induced disasters and climate change”

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2016-2020, Kazakhstan
Evaluation Type:
Outcome
Planned End Date:
12/2018
Completion Date:
12/2018
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
30,000

Share

Title EVALUATION OF THE COUNTRY PROGRAMME OUTCOME 1.3 “Ecosystems and natural resources are protected and sustainably used, and human settlements are resilient to natural and human-induced disasters and climate change”
Atlas Project Number: 97247,88403,82364,81141,86627,89800,81775,60598
Evaluation Plan: 2016-2020, Kazakhstan
Evaluation Type: Outcome
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 12/2018
Planned End Date: 12/2018
Management Response: Yes
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
  • 1. 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
  • 2. 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
Evaluation Budget(US $): 30,000
Source of Funding: UNDP
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 18,600
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
N/A
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders: Ministry of National Economy, Ministry of Energy, others
Countries: KAZAKHSTAN
Lessons
Findings
1.

CHAPTER 4: MAIN FINDINGS

The findings of this evaluation are organized along the four standard dimensions of UNDP evaluations: i) relevance (the extent to which the programme was relevant to the country’s priorities and needs); ii) effectiveness (whether the programme was effective in achieving the desired and planned outcomes); iii) efficiency (whether the process of achieving the results was efficient); and, iv) sustainability (the extent to which the benefits of the programme are likely to be sustained).

4.1. RELEVANCE

This section provides an assessment of the relevance of the UNDP E&E programme. While there may be many criteria for assessing relevance, here it will be assessed along the following key dimensions: 1. Country Needs and Priorities defined in National Strategies, Policies and Programmes; 2. International Commitments and Agreements; 3. UN Country Priorities and UNDP’s Country Mandate and Strategy

4.1.1. Relevance with Country Needs and Priorities

Assessing the relevance of the E&E programme against national priorities and strategies requires an understanding of how these priorities and strategies are defined and pursued by the authorities. The country’s overarching strategic framework is “Kazakhstan 2050”, the country’s long-term vision announced by the President during his annual state of the nation address on December 15, 2012. Kazakhstan 2050 is complemented by the Nurly Zhol programme (Path to the Future), which lays out a host of measures targeted at infrastructure development, and “100 Concrete Steps to Implement Five Institutional Reforms”, which is a plan of specific measures that implement the 2050 vision.


Tag: Climate Change Adaptation Biodiversity Energy Coherence Relevance Project and Programme management

2.

4.2. EFFECTIVENESS

This section provides an assessment of the extent to which UNDP Kazakhstan has achieved what it committed to achieve through its E&E programme. The first part of the section examines the E&E section of the Results and Resources Framework (RRF) of UNDP’s CPD and compares commitments made at the beginning of the programme with what has actually been achieved by the time of the evaluation. The second part of the section provides a broader overview of UNDP’s contributions in this area, including areas that were not captured in the CPD.

4.2.1. Progress towards the Realization of Country Programme Outcomes

Table 10 below shows the country programme outcome and output indicators and targets for the E&E area, as they were specified in the RRF section of the 2016-2020 CPD at the beginning of the programme cycle. These indicators and targets represent the commitments made by the CO for the entirety of the sector. Table 10 also presents an analysis of the results achieved by the CO up until the point of this evaluation. It should be emphasized that the achievements in the table were reported by the CO on the basis of their monitoring and reporting tools and were not independently verified by the evaluator in the course of this assignment (an independent collection or verification of detailed quantitative information did not fall under the scope of this evaluation). From the information provided by the CO in the table, we can see that two of the four outcome targets have already been met. The other two are achieved at about 50% or less (with 2 years left this the end of the programme). Also, a comparison of the output indicators at the beginning of the programme and by the time of the evaluation shows that most output targets set in the CPD have already been met by 2018 or are well on track to being met by 2020. As can be seen from the table, only two indicators (1.5 and 3.2) lag behind their targets and face an uncertain future.


Tag: Effectiveness Monitoring and Evaluation Project and Programme management Results-Based Management Theory of Change

3.

4.2. EFFECTIVENESS (continuation)

4.2.2. Overview of Main Contributions

The previous section and Table 10 provided some details about UNDP’s achievements against the results framework laid out in its 2016-2020 CPD. This section provides a broader summary of UNDP’s contributions beyond what laid out in the CPD. When talking about UNDP contributions, it should first be noted that some projects in the bundle have started more recently, so it is too early to talk about substantive results for them yet. As can be seen from Table 12 below, these are in particular the Housing Management, EESL and MIA projects (marked in green in the table). So, the focus of this section will be on the contributions of the other ten which have been going on for more than a couple of years.

Biodiversity and Natural Resource Management In the area of biodiversity and natural resource management, UNDP has had a substantial and sustained engagement through the CB2, Desert, SLM and Green Bridge projects (as well as earlier projects which do not fall under the scope of this evaluation). The CB2 project supported the revision of the wildlife, forestry, and protected areas codes, amendments to the Environmental Impact Assessment procedures and piloted a methodology and set of tools for the economic valuation of natural resources in two sites (Ile-Balkash and Ustyurt). Through the development of a host of tools (methodologies, approaches, concepts) for the economic valuation of natural resources and training on the use of these tools, the CB2 project contributed to the improvement of planning and decision-making in the management of natural resources. UNDP also contributed to the development of payment schemes for ecosystem services. The Desert project contributed to the creation of four new protected areas, one ecological corridor and the expansion of one national park. The territory of the Altyn Emel national park was expanded by almost 52% (146,500 ha). To improve the management of these protected areas, UNDP supported the development of management plans and training of staff. UNDP has also supported the development of mechanisms for the provision of micro-credits in locations adjacent to protected areas aimed at the replacement of unsustainable practices with alternative ones. The SLM project has had a strong focus on the demonstration of innovative techniques and schemes in integrated territorial and land use planning in steppe, arid and semi-arid zones in six different regions of Kazakhstan, ultimately aiming at enhancing the conservation-friendliness and sustainability of productive agricultural landscapes. The Green Bridge project contributed to the improvement of the legal framework and training of government staff in the areas of fisheries and aquaculture. The project also piloted a sturgeon breeding farm in the Aktobe region. Overall, in this area UNDP has contributed directly to expanding and strengthening the management of protected areas, reduction of pressure on the biodiversity of desert and semi-desert ecosystems and wetlands, development of fishing and farming, etc. Over 234,000 hectares of degraded agricultural lands have been restored and hundreds of jobs have been directly created.


Tag: Climate Change Adaptation Climate change governance Biodiversity Natural Resouce management Water resources Effectiveness

4.

4.3. EFFICIENCY

This section provides an assessment of the efficiency of the portfolio by focusing on key parameters closely associated with efficient programme management. • Operational efficiencies such as budget execution rates, timeliness of project activities and the sector’s organizational structure;

• Quality of the human resource; • Linkages and synergies: the extent to which E&E activities are coordinated with other activities in the sector and the broader UNDP programme; • Coordination with development partners: the extent of coordination and cooperation with other development organizations operating in the country. 

4.3.1. Operational Efficiencies

Budget Execution

Rates Budget execution rates show the proportion of a project’s resources that has been spent at a certain point in the project’s lifetime. Inefficient projects are typically inadequately planned or have delays in expenditure which result in higher amounts of spending occurring at accelerated rates closer to project end dates. This typically leads to hurried decisions and hastened implementation which is rarely efficient. Also, project extensions lead to higher administrative costs which reduce the overall efficiency of the intervention. Table 13 below shows budget execution rates for each project in the period 2016-2018 (up to November 2018).

As can be seen from the table, most projects have execution rates between 90 and 100%. Exceptions (with weaker rates) are the following projects – Green Bridge, SLM and EESL. Projects with weaker execution rates tend to be the ones which have started more recently, which is often explained by a tendency to underspend in the first year of the project as the project infrastructure is being established. The overall execution rate for the portfolio for the period in question is 90%. Table 14 shows in more detail budgeted and spent amounts for all 13 E&E projects for each year of the 2016-2018 period. Year 2016 had an overall execution rate of about 80%, followed with years 2017 and 2018 with rates 94% and 98% respectively. Further, from the table it can be seen that the SLM and Green Bridge projects had a significant under execution in 2016, followed by CAST, Green Economy and Sustainable Cities in the same year. Table 14: Budget Execution Rates by Project and Year.


Tag: Efficiency Human and Financial resources Operational Efficiency Programme Synergy Coordination

5.

4.3. EFFICIENCY (continuation)

4.3.2. Quality of the Human Resource UNDP’s single most important assets are its people. The quality of the individuals who deliver its activities is crucial for the quality of its work, as well as its reputation, competitiveness, partnerships, fundraising ability and ultimately its value proposition. There are multiple links between the quality of UNDP’s human resource and the efficiency of its work. The assessment of the quality of the human resources employed by the E&E projects revealed that overall it is adequate and in line with country needs and programme requirements. The SDU unit is structured effectively and functions well. There are clear roles and responsibilities and lines of accountability for team members. Project staff are highly-qualified individuals who work in challenging circumstances. Many of them have previous experience with implementing UNDP projects and are proficient with UNDP operational rules and procedures. The CO has created portfolios which combine projects into bundles and which enables a project manager to manage a bundle of projects, rather than an individual project. The portfolio approach to managing the projects appears to have been useful, allowing the unit to create economies of scale and maintain project managers and staff when individual projects close down. This has provided a good solution to the perennial challenge of short project timeframes faced by most UNDP COs. Short timeframes do not allow for job stability for the people employed in the projects, which typically leads to high turnover rates. Also, significant investments in the capacity of project staff are not possible in such short timeframes. The fact that the CO has created depth in the areas of biodiversity and natural resource management and climate change and energy efficiency has facilitated, and has in turn been facilitated by, the creation of these bundles. Further, the current project teams seem to be well-managed and led by competent managers, which have been with the UNDP for quite some time and have developed their skills and contacts with the government. The portfolio approach should be maintained and, where possible, further consolidated. 

Also, the way the unit is embedded into the overall CO structure seems quite effective. The current organizational structure seems to have stabilized, in contrast to some other UNDP COs where it is under continuous restructuring. This stability enables the sector to develop clear profiles and roles and maintain competent staff. The sector has also addressed well another major challenge the CO faces in this area - the technical nature of the E&E cluster. Project staff, and in particular project managers, have not only good management or administrative skills, but also deep technical knowledge and experience in the areas they cover (i.e. climate change, energy efficiency, water management, etc.). The sector relies on a set of CTAs with solid skills, who were praised by a number of partners during interviews for this evaluation.


Tag: Efficiency Human and Financial resources Programme Synergy

6.

4.3. EFFICIENCY (continuation)

4.3.4. Coordination with National and Development Partners

During this programme cycle, the Government of Kazakhstan has undergone significant changes, especially in the areas that are relevant to the E&E cluster. Since adoption of the Green Economy Concept in 2013, the government has established Green Economy Council with UN participation. The Council gathers annually and considers strategic directions in the transition to a green economy model. UNDP’s planned programme activities and proposals for government costsharing projects are annually presented at the Strategic Advisory Council led by Deputy Prime Minister. A major government restructuring that took place in 2014 led to the dissolution of the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Water Resources and transfer of its functions to the Ministry of Energy and Ministry of Agriculture. The Committee for Forestry and Hunting (CFH) was moved into the Ministry of Agriculture and merged with Fisheries to become the Committee for Forestry and Wildlife (CFW). Climate change and energy efficiency policies were transferred to the Ministry of Energy. The Ministry of Energy (Department of Green Economy and Department of Climate Change) is now the focal point for UNDP’s E&E cluster. It also acts as a focal point for GEF and GCF projects. Coordination is carried out through the Department of Green Economy in the Ministry. UNDP provides the Ministry of Energy with reports on all E&E projects on a semi-annual basis. Other key partner ministries for this cluster are the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Investment and Development. UNDP also works in this area with a range of civil society organisations. UNDP has also partnered with a number of domestic financial institutioons such as the Fund for Entrepreneurship Development “Damu” (rural business), National “Baiterek” Holding (construction, infrastructure, innovation), JSC “Sovereign Wealth Fund “SamrukKazyna” (energy), JSC “National Holding “KazAgro” (agriculture), etc. In addition to the restructuring, the government has been experiences a high turnover rate among its staff. Some of the key institutions have experienced frequent changes in the senior and middle management, which has in some cases lead to delays in project implementation. This includes the Ministry of Energy and the GEF focal point which is an essential position for GEF-funded project.


Tag: Climate Change Adaptation Energy Efficiency Donor relations Bilateral partners Country Government Donor UN Agencies Coordination

7.

4.4. SUSTAINABILITY

While the sustainability of UNDP’s work in the E&E area is shaped by a number of factors, the focus of this report will be on those aspects that require more attention from the sector team and CO management. The areas that will be reviewed in this section are: i) policy implementation; ii) pilots, replication, and institutionalization; iii) co-financing by the government and private sector; and, iv) information sharing and awareness raising.

4.4.1. Policy Implementation

A key feature of UNDP’s E&E programme with important implications for sustainability is its focus on policy formulation. A number of projects have contributed to the development of policy instruments - draft laws, regulations or strategies. For example, the Desert project has supported amendments to the Law on Protected Areas, the CB2 project has supported 33 amendments to two environmental codes and the development of three draft laws, the Green Bridge project has supported 62 amendments to the “Law on Protection, Reproduction and Use of the Wildlife”, the Housing Management project has supported the development of one draft law and six legal acts, the SLM project has supported the development of the “Law on Pasture” and “Law on Organic Farming”, etc. Projects like Green Economy, EEL, and Medwaste have supported the development of a range of standards and methodologies in their respective areas.Beyond the approval/adoption of policy and legislation, a serious issue for all levels of government is implementation. Kazakhstan has developed and adopted numerous policy documents related to the concept of green economy (see Table 8 for the list of major strategies in the area of environment and energy efficiency). However, a severe problem is weak implementation. This was identified as a major issue by many stakeholders interviewed for this evaluation. Insufficient follow through on policy development is a systemic challenge for all levels of government. A number of approved programmes in the energy and environmental sectors exist on paper and are not implemented. Years of reforms and amendments in legislation and policies have led to only small improvements in the capability to implement. 


Tag: Effectiveness Efficiency Sustainability Policies & Procedures Project and Programme management

8.

4.4. SUSTAINABILITY (continuation)

4.4.3. Co-financing by the Government and the Private Sector

In the current programme cycle, the E&E portfolio has generated significant commitments of cofinancing or cost-sharing by government entities or the private sector. Co-financing is not only an indication of commitment and ownership by national partners, but also an important aspect ofsustainability. It is important that the projects promoted by UNDP be placed on a sound footing with sustainable financing provided by the state or the market. Table 16 below shows the amount of contributions committed the government (national and subnational levels) and other sources (primarily the private sector) as agreed in signed project documents. This is mainly in the form of in-kind contributions for the various demonstration pilots or infrastructure initiatives designed to take place under the projects. For the whole sector, the amount of co-financing expected from government sources is more than US$ 153 m. Furthermore, more than US$ 90 m is expected from other sources, including the private sector. 


Tag: Global Environment Facility fund Government Cost-sharing Private Sector Financing Communication Knowledge management Advocacy

9.

CHAPTER 5: STRATEGIC POSITIONING

This section analyzes UNDP’s comparative advantage and its positioning in the country’s development context relative to its comparative advantage. It also examines the partnerships’ strategy that UNDP could pursue and identify sources of funding which the CO could tap into for its next programme cycle.

5.1. UNDP’S COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE

UNDP is well-positioned and has significant comparative advantages in the area of E&E in Kazakhstan.

• First, UNDP has accumulated an extensive experience in addressing energy and environmental issues in the country and has created significant depth in the areas of biodiversity and natural resources, climate change and energy efficiency, and waste and water management.

• Second, meetings conducted for this evaluation with a wide range of actors confirmed that UNDP has developed good relations with governments and civil society at all levels. Stakeholders value UNDP for its neutrality and impartiality and trust and respect it. The access to governments and civil society that UNDP enjoys place it in a good position to play a strong advocacy role and undertake pioneering initiatives.


Tag: Climate Change Adaptation Energy Effectiveness Efficiency Global Environment Facility fund Government Cost-sharing Private Sector Financing Resource mobilization Donor relations Strategic Positioning Bilateral partners

10.

5.3. CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES

Gender Evidence collected in the course of this evaluation has indicated the E&E programme has improved its gender focus, taking into consideration the specific needs of women. Most projects are designed to have specific measures to address gender inequalities and promote the involvement of women in their activities. At implementation, gender equality was applied to ensure that legal and policy frameworks were gender-sensitive and the development strategies took consideration of gender equality in terms of analysis, priorities and gender-sensitive indicators. With regards to the pilots and infrastructure projects, vulnerable groups and women, particularly in rural areas, have been targeted through direct interventions such as energy efficiency retrofits, installation of solar panels to diversify access to energy, irrigation schemes, etc., based on criteria which prioritize vulnerable communities and female-headed households. It is pertinent to important to also mention that women in some of the UNDP interventions women largely appear as agents of change and not as passive recipients of assistance. They are entrepreneurs, producers, innovators and managers. Their managing of small grants and participation in EXPO 2017 were positive examples of their strengths as innovators and ‘green’ entrepreneurs.

The CO has also worked at the advocacy level to improve the gender perspective in environmental and energy policy. A range of activities have been recently undertaken to achieve this. For example, in the framework of the World Petroleum Council meeting of 2018 held in Astana, UNDP organized a side-event on the promotion of gender policy in the energy sector. In a recent Green Energy & Waste Recycling Forum, UNDP advocated for a gender lens to the management of chemical substances and dangerous waste. Also, in 2018 the CO organized a seminar on intersection of gender and biodiversity. These are unique contributions in a field which is typically quite disconnected from the gender dimension. This is one of the areas in which UNDP has increased its assistance for the government in complying with Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and implementing the recommendations of the UN Committee’s Concluding Comments to Kazakhstan’s Report on CEDAW. In light of the intensification of work in this area, UNDP has submitted its application for the Gender Seal certification process in 2018. Areas where the CO should invest further efforts are on strengthening gender reporting to better reflect UNDP’s contribution to gender equality and women’s empowerment at both the programme and project levels. Gender statistics remains an area of weakness. Although the CPD explicitly refers to gender equality, it does not set any genderdisaggregated indicators and targets. Also, most of the project documents reviewed for this evaluation do not have gender-specific targets even when their activities are sufficiently oriented towards gender equality. This has already been pointed out in a number of project evaluations.


Tag: Climate change governance Vulnerable Biodiversity Effectiveness Gender Equality Gender Mainstreaming Women's Empowerment Human rights Integration Policies & Procedures

11.

Relevance (Continuation from Finding 1)

4.1.2. Relevance with International Commitments and Agreements Being a signatory to major international and regional agreements, Kazakhstan is committed to fulfilling a range of international obligations. Kazakhstan hasratified the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) on 9 June 1994, and the Convention to Combat Desertification and Drought on 9 July 1997. It has also ratified a number of related protocols under the Rio Conventions, including the Cartagena Protocol on Biological Safety (8 September 2008) to protect biodiversity from the potential risks posed by genetically modified organisms that are the product of biotechnology, etc. In 1995, Kazakhstan ratified the UNFCCC as a non-Annex I party, and in 1999 committed to limit GHG emissions and accept a binding and quantified emission limitation of 100% over a 1992 baseline. The Kyoto Protocol was ratified on 19 June 2009, committing to stabilize greenhouse gas emissions for the period 2008-2012 at the 1990 level”. Further, in 2010 Kazakhstan announced and communicated to the Parties its additional voluntary commitments to reduce GHG emissions by 15% by 2020 below 1990 emissions and by 25% by 2050. In 2015, Kazakhstan submitted its Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) to UNFCCC, which represented a milestone in reinforcing the country’s commitment to the targets under the Green Economy Concept. Through its INDC, Kazakhstan reconfirmed its intention to reduce the economy-wide GHG emissions by 15% to 25% towards 2030 compared to the 1990-level. The INDC explicitly referred to the Green Economy Concept, and identified the link between development priorities outlined in the concept and the mitigation targets expressed in the INDC, especially on energy saving and renewable energy development. 


Tag: Climate Change Adaptation Ecosystem based adaption Environment Policy Natural Resouce management Relevance Policies & Procedures Results-Based Management Strategic Positioning

12.

Effectiveness (Continuation from Finding 2)

Beyond the formulation of the RRF, it is also its use that presents some shortcomings. As can be seen from Table 10, the results reported by the CO (on the right side of the table above) are not totally clear and do not always correspond to the indicators (on the left). Without going into a fairly detailed analysis of the shortcomings here, it clear that the CO needs to monitor its results against the CPD’s RRF more clearly and on a regular basis. At the time of this evaluation, the CO had to mobilize efforts to compile the information in the table, and even with that there is still room for further improvement in how the results are organized and reported. It is understandable that the CPD framework does not correspond well to the actual activities on the ground because it is usually difficult to predict at the beginning of the CPD cycle which projects will be implemented in the course of the cycle. This is the case for most UNDP COs which depend on funding from external sources. However, despite this challenge, it will be useful for the CO to stay on top of its results and be able to track on a regular basis and quickly report what has been achieved at the programme level. The tracking of results at the programme level should not be done for the sake of compiling annual reports, but needs to become an ongoing practice that helps the team manage the programme more effectively. This practice should be strengthened in the new CPD cycle.


Tag: Climate Change Adaptation Disaster Risk Reduction Ecosystem based adaption Environment Policy Effectiveness Monitoring and Evaluation Results-Based Management

13.

(Continuation from Finding 3)

Chemicals and Waste Management In the area of waste management, the Medwaste project helped the government update the national implementation plan for new and unintentional persistent organic pollutants (POPs) under its commitments emanating from the Stockholm convention, strengthen POPs monitoring capability, and improve institutional coordination on chemicals. Another contribution at the legislative level was the introduction of amendments to the Environmental Code regarding establishing standard emissions of dioxins and furans. Support was provided to the development of a system for the accreditation of laboratories of POPs-POPs pesticides. The project also demonstrated in pilot territories the safe disposal of medical waste through autoclaving. The Medwaste project has also supported the assessment of mercury situation, preparation of recommendations related to the Minamata convention and preliminary plan on the reduction of mercury use. An agreement to end the use of mercury thermometers in the healthcare system was signed with health authorities in pilot regions. Further, UNDP has recently started the MIA project to support the Ministry of Energy in conducting the Initial Mercury Assessment, which will enable the government to identify the requirements and needs for the ratification of the Minamata Convention and create the basis for its implementation.


Tag: Climate Change Adaptation Climate change governance Ecosystem based adaption Waste management Effectiveness

14.

4.3. EFFICIENCY (Continuation from Finding 5)

Synergies with Other Sectors As has already been discussed in section 3.4, the CO has two main programme units – SDU and GLD – covering three outcome areas (in addition to regional cooperation which is a smaller section of the programme). Interviewees for this evaluation noted that regular meetings at the programme level take place to coordinate activities between the GLD and SDU units. However, the evidence on synergies between projects was less substantial outside the cluster than within. A number of stakeholders of E&E projects were not well aware of UNDP projects in other areas and could not speak to joint initiatives. Also, a quick review of the portfolio’s project documents revealed no strong linkages are identified at the design stage with projects from the governance sector. There are obvious reasons for why greater synergies across sectors are difficult to forge. UNDP’s funding is often of an opportunistic nature, so projects are developed with specific donors in mind and are driven by specific donor requirements and priorities, resulting in programmatic fragmentation and multiple projects with sometimes overlapping outputs and activities, potentially limiting results and impact. Also, when the funding source is committed to a specific issue or project, sector “silos” emerge within the programme and get further reinforced by separate project teams and steering committees. UNDP’s funding model is not going to change any time soon, so the challenges of creating synergies between the different sectors will remain. What the CO can do, however, is to strengthen project linkages as much as possible within the existing constraints.


Tag: Policies & Procedures Programme Synergy Coordination Climate change governance Ecosystem based adaption Effectiveness Efficiency Partnership

15.

Continuation from Finding 8

4.4.4. Information Sharing and Awareness Raising

Most of the projects in the E&E portfolio have significant components related to information sharing and awareness raising around issues of sustainable development, promotion of energy efficiency and renewable energies, good water management practices, etc. Sustainable Cities, CAST, Medwaste and EEL are examples of projects that have had large awareness raising components, with large budgets for public information activities. This evaluation was not able to estimate of the amount of money spent on awareness raising activities, but the number must be quite significant relative to the total budget spent for the portfolio. While many of these activities are useful and serve a clear purpose, this is probably a good time for the UNDP to take a more strategic approach in this area. Taking the work on information sharing and awareness one notch up will help the CO strengthen its impact and image in the country. The first thing that the CO could to do in this area is to recognize the information sharing and awareness raising are done for a simple reason – to change people’s behavior. If we take the EEL project, for example, changing consumer behavior to shift to energy efficient lighting and safe disposal of the CFLs is one of its main objectives. So, when designing information campaigns and events, it is important to ask what behavior and whose behavior are we trying to change. This requires a lot of careful thinking about the type of behavior we want to promote and the agents whose behavior we want to change.


Tag: Climate Change Adaptation Ecosystem based adaption Energy Communication Knowledge management Awareness raising

16.

Continuation from Finding 7

4.4.2. Pilots, Replication and Institutionalization

UNDP’s E&E programme has had a significant focus on piloting and demonstrating innovative solutions to specific problems, with the expectation that if successful they will be replicated, scaled up and institutionalized by government institutions. The general idea is that UNDP is not in the business of solving specific problems, but helping national stakeholders identify systemic solutions to these problems. The following are just a few (non-exhaustive) examples that provide a sense of the importance and intensity of piloting in this portfolio of projects:

• SLM project has had a strong focus on the demonstration of innovative techniques and schemes in integrated territorial and land use planning in steppe, arid and semi-arid zones in six different regions of Kazakhstan, ultimately aiming at enhancing the conservationfriendliness and sustainability of productive agricultural landscapes. • Desert project carried out a host of pilot activities, including: i) restoration of the Aidarkol lakes system; ii) rehabilitation of two areas of degraded pastures through the establishment of “distant pastures” through the restoration of water points and accommodation; iii) diversification and rotation of crops (away from rice monocultures) in demonstration sites in the Akdala area of the Balkash rayon; iv) conservation of Asiatic poplar woodlands; and, v) introduction of water and energy saving technologies for tree nurseries. The project worked with the laboratory of the National Forest Seed Breeding Centre to propagate Asiatic poplar seedlings for the first time and plant them in three pilot sites. An ecological monitoring system was put into place to support and inform conservation and land use planning in the pilot or demonstration sites. • Green Economy project implemented a “grant programme” consisting of 11 small pilots and 4 large pilots primarily in the area of water management. The grant programme was designed to demonstrate that green technologies can not only reduce pressure on natural resources, but also improve economic efficiency with acceptable initial costs. • Green Bridge piloted a number of solar energy projects in the Astana and Almaty regions and a fishing farm in the Aktobe region. • CB2 project piloted a methodology and tools for the economic valuation of natural resources in Ile-Balkhash and Kansu area of Karakiya district of Mangistau region. • Sustainable Cities project has had an innovative and piloting nature, especially regarding the creation of a financial support mechanism. The project has worked with 15 partner cities to help them identify, prioritize and prepare bankable energy efficiency projects through a variety of instruments, including Public-Private Partnerships (PPP). For the selected pilot cities, a list of urban sector projects was identified on the basis of economic calculations and risk analysis. • EEL demonstrated the technical feasibility and the economic, social and environmental impact of energy-efficient lighting in two piloting sites in Astana and Almaty. The project also piloted the developed of schemes for the collection, transportation, and utilization of mercury lamps. • Medwaste project piloted in East-Kazakhstan, Kostanay regions and the city of Astana the safe disposal of medical waste through autoclaving. • Housing Management projectinvolves the piloting of the management of residential buildings in two locations.


Tag: Climate Change Adaptation Environment Policy Natural Resouce management Sustainability Policies & Procedures Project and Programme management Results-Based Management

17.

5.2. POSITIONING AND RESOURCE MOBILIZATION (Continuation from Finding 9)

As has already been discussed in Chapter 3 of this report (and shown in Table 6), UNDP’s E&E portfolio consists of four main thematic pillars – i) Energy Efficiency and Climate Change, ii) Biodiversity and Natural Resource Management, iii) Chemicals and Waste Management, and; iv) Water Management. There are certainly other aspects that are addressed by the E&E projects – such as land management, transport, disaster risk reduction, etc. – but these are usually smaller aspects that are embedded into the main themes listed above. The E&E programme constitutes the largest sector in the country programme and has grown significantly recently. In terms of funding, the E&E programme has relied primarily on one major donor – GEF. With the largest GEF portfolio in the Regional Bureau for Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States, UNDP Kazakhstan has been particularly successful in mobilizing funding from this source. In the portfolio of 13 projects, GEF has financed 10, contributing a total of about US$ 29 m and thus providing 73% of the portfolio’s total financing (as shown in Figure 8 below). Also, the EU has provided more than US$ 8 m in the area of water management. This constitutes 21% of total financing for the portfolio. A smaller contribution of about US$ 2.5 m has been provided by the Government of Kazakhstan which represents about 6% of the total portfolio. 

The success of the E&E sector in resource mobilization can be seen in Table 17 below. At the beginning of the programme cycle, the CO budgeted in its CPD about US$ 23 m for the E&E sector. As of the time of the evaluation (November 2018), the sector had spent about US$ 24 m – US$ 1 m in excess of the full-cycle target two years ahead of the end of the cycle. This is a significant achievement, especially when set against the other sectors which at the point of this evaluation had spent between 25 and 60% of what they had planned in the CPD. For all the success of the CO in resource mobilization in this area, most E&E projects are quickly coming to an end. The CO will enter the new programme cycle with only a handful of E&E projects (certainly, more could materialize in the next two years). Of the 13 projects under the scope of this evaluation, only one (EESL) extends into 2021 and 2022. The CO has recently started two other major projects, which did not fall under the scope of this evaluation, that also extend beyond 2020 – “Conservation and sustainable management of key globally important ecosystems for multiple benefits” and “De-risking Renewable Energy Investment”. So, at this point in time there are only a few E&E projects that continue into the new programming cycle. Looking forward, the key questions the CO faces are – How is the sector currently positioned and what types of activities and sources of funding will be available to sustain its activities in the coming years? Which types of activities and thematic areas the CO should engage with? Here the CO is running against a serious challenge. As an upper-middle income country, Kazakhstan is facing decreasing financing options from development donors. This, combined with fiercer competition among development partners for a smaller pool of funding, will present an increasing challenge to UNDP. 


Tag: Climate Change Adaptation Climate change governance Green Economy Natural Resouce management Efficiency Global Environment Facility fund Government Cost-sharing Resource mobilization Donor relations Strategic Positioning

18.

5.2. POSITIONING AND RESOURCE MOBILIZATION (Continuation from Findings 9 & 17)

As far as non-traditional sources of funding are concerned, the CO has invested a lot of effort already across all programme areas, but particularly in the E&E sector. The CO has signed a financing agreement with the Islamic Development Bank (IsDB) amounting to US$ 1.4 m in the area of rural water supply, as part of an overarching loan agreement signed by GoK with the IsDB in 2017. Through this agreement, UNDP will deliver technical assistance activities under the larger loan. Based on the successful implementation of the EU-funded project in the water sector, the activities under this agreement will aim at modernizing irrigation and water supply systems of South Kazakhstan and Almaty regions. The CO has also had negotiations with the World Bank (WB) to implement capacity development components of WB loans in the areas of agriculture and forestry. Another idea the CO has been exploring is the execution of soft components of European Investment Bank loans in the area of energy efficiency and climate change. Similar negotiations have taken place with the Asian Development Bank (on irrigation), Eurasian Development Bank (for the de-risking investments in the renewable energy sector project), and EBRD (on parallel financing of large capital infrastructure works within the Sustainable Cities project). The CO has also sought to reach out to the newly established Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, where Kazakhstan owns a small share, to explore potential collaboration in the area of green industries’ development.


Tag: International Financial Institutions SDG Integration Resource mobilization Donor relations Partnership Programme Synergy Strategic Positioning Efficiency

Recommendations
1

Results-Based Management at the Sectoral Level

In preparation for the development of the new CPD, the CO should strengthen the RBM system at the programme and project level.

  • While it is hard to develop an RRF at the CPD level that will stay realistic and useful till the end of the programme cycle (given the uncertainty of programme funding), it is important for the CO to strengthen the system through which it tracks programme and project results on an ongoing basis. Information on some basic indicators that are driven by the nature of projects undertaken by the CO should be quickly available at any time and should be used by the CO management and sector teams to monitor and manage activities.
  • The CO should strengthen the quality criteria for the development of project documents. This is an area where there is high predictability and having a well-structured project RRF is essential for the monitoring and management of project activities.
  • The sector will also benefit from the development of a Theory of Change that connects all the specific pieces (projects). This is not just a theoretical exercise, but has practical value in that it will provide the team with insights into how these individual projects could be tied more effectively together.
  • Also, the CO should strengthen quality criteria for evaluations and the way it manages the learning that is derived from them. The CO should develop minimum quality criteria for project evaluations and should establish a tracking system to closely monitor their quality.
2

Positioning and Resource Mobilization

In terms of positioning, the CO should continue to consolidate its position in the areas of biodiversity and natural resources, climate change and energy efficiency, and waste and water management. These are areas where UNDP Kazakhstan has already positioned itself well and is quite competitive. The DRR sector could offer opportunities for further work, if funding will be available. Furthermore, one cross-cutting issue with which the sector should be engaged more actively is the Sustainable Development Goals. Work on the SDGs should be coordinated closely between the sectors, but the E&E sector can play a much bigger role. Potential work the E&E sector could engage in includes the incorporation of SDGs in strategic documents and policies, establishing national targets and baselines to measure progress, supporting the distribution of responsibilities among government institutions, establishing data and monitoring systems that support SDGs, and assisting with reporting nationally and internationally. Overall, the E&E sector is well positioned to support through the SDG process the mainstreaming of the environmental concerns into the country’s legal and policy framework and assist the government in further implementing the concept of Green Economy.

The highest priority for the CO in the area of E&E now is the mobilization of funding. Ongoing efforts with traditional donors which as GEF and the EU should continue, although the amount of financing expected from these sources will continue to decline. With regards to the EU, the CO should undertake a more systematic assessment and identification of opportunities by researching what the EU is planning for Kazakhstan.  In this context, the CO could launch a more organized process of exploration concerning all sectors and involving UNDP’s representation in Brussels and New York. As far as non-traditional donors are concerned, UNDP should continue its current efforts at identifying new modes of engagement. The IFIs, in particular, present good potential which the CO should explore by developing innovative mechanisms – such as the management of technical assistance components in the framework of loan agreements. 

3

Programme Integration

The CO should strengthen integration between sectors by establishing integrated frameworks for project planning and implementation. Governance and diversification activities, especially at the sub-national level, provide the E&E sector with a platform on which to embed environmental and energy efficiency initiatives. In the upcoming CPD, the CO could consider merging E&E and diversification activities, given their complementary nature (depending on whether diversification activities will be active by that time). The CO should also explore the feasibility of integrated work plans elaborated at the regional/local level and matched with the CO’s plan at the national level. Such an area-based approach will enable UNDP to weave more effectively cross-cutting issues (such as energy efficiency, citizen engagement, transparency and accountability, gender equality) into other thematic activities (i.e. community development, service delivery, etc.). Stronger synergies may also be forged with international organizations at the sub-national level, which may also provide increased funding opportunities. UNDP can also support local authorities to facilitate more effectively donor coordination at the sub-national level. A crucial step in achieving a higher level of programme integration and consolidation at that level could be the development of a clearer strategy for how UNDP should structure itself and operate at the sub-national level.

4

Policy implementation

The CO should further strengthen its focus on implementation, by thinking beyond just the passing of laws and strategies, and considering measures that consolidate organizational structures that will implement those laws and strategies. This includes actions like the creation of organizational structures, staffing organizations and allocating funding for their operations, training management and staff to implement policies, etc. The sector team has already been doing a lot of this, but the point here is to promote a mentality shift in the programme and within the government away from “form” (how a piece of law looks like) to functionality (how a law is implemented and what effects it produces).  From this perspective, it is important that the team consider how the capability of government organizations is built and changes. For this, the CO should develop RBM systems that track implementation parameters linked to functionality and outcomes rather than form and inputs/outputs and assess more rigorously the sustainability of achievements. Project documents should contain clear criteria related to performance based on a strategy for achieving and demonstrating results. Achieving this focus on functionality and outcomes is difficult when considering the short timeframes of UNDP projects, but it is not impossible. What is important is the mentality shift which implies that UNDP staff start designing and implementing projects with these implementation considerations in mind.

5

Co-financing

The CO has had good results when it comes to co-financing. For projects that involve infrastructure investments it is essential to keep pushing for stronger competitive/market mechanisms to ensure the sustainability and scale of initiatives. Overall, the recommendation here is to stay on the same path and not backtrack, because market-based solutions to infrastructure problems are essential for their sustainability. Instead of providing grants, UNDP should keep strengthening incentives that promote access to international financial institutions and banks for finance.

6

Awareness Raising

In the area of awareness raising and information sharing, the CO should reassess its approaches, methods and results more strategically. This is an area where there have been significant shifts in research and practice recently and it is time for UNDP to upgrade its approach. First, the CP should recognize that information sharing and awareness raising are done for a simple reason – to change  behavior. So, when designing  information campaigns and events, it is important to ask what behavior and whose behavior the programme or project is seeking to change. This requires careful thinking about the behavior the programme/project seeks to promote and the agents whose behavior it wants to change. As a next step, it is also important to understand what type of information and what channel of information has the potential to change the identified behavior in the target group. The way the information is packaged matters a lot, but who carries the information and how that person is perceived by the target group matters even more. In this sense, it is important to understand whose opinion matters for the target group and how that opinion can be constructed and used to influence behavior. It is also important to recognize that individuals operate in a social environment and that human behavior is largely influenced by social norms set by the community in which an individual embedded. So, to change an individual’s behavior, it is important to understand the prevailing social norms in his/her community and the factors that shape those social norms. This is something that the CO could examine a bit more closely in the context of the development of the new CPD and new projects.

1. Recommendation:

Results-Based Management at the Sectoral Level

In preparation for the development of the new CPD, the CO should strengthen the RBM system at the programme and project level.

  • While it is hard to develop an RRF at the CPD level that will stay realistic and useful till the end of the programme cycle (given the uncertainty of programme funding), it is important for the CO to strengthen the system through which it tracks programme and project results on an ongoing basis. Information on some basic indicators that are driven by the nature of projects undertaken by the CO should be quickly available at any time and should be used by the CO management and sector teams to monitor and manage activities.
  • The CO should strengthen the quality criteria for the development of project documents. This is an area where there is high predictability and having a well-structured project RRF is essential for the monitoring and management of project activities.
  • The sector will also benefit from the development of a Theory of Change that connects all the specific pieces (projects). This is not just a theoretical exercise, but has practical value in that it will provide the team with insights into how these individual projects could be tied more effectively together.
  • Also, the CO should strengthen quality criteria for evaluations and the way it manages the learning that is derived from them. The CO should develop minimum quality criteria for project evaluations and should establish a tracking system to closely monitor their quality.
Management Response: [Added: 2018/12/27] [Last Updated: 2020/11/30]

The country office accepts the recommendation.

UNDP Kazakhstan has been continuously working to enhance the monitoring system and RBM and will ensure the improvement of planning and reporting (internally and outside UNDP) both on the programme and projects outcome level. Programme and projects staff are duly informed and trained on the reporting tools and how to make best use of it. Anyhow the country office sees the place for the improvement of M&E system  and RBM in the office.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Reinforcement of M&E and RBM in the country office Standard Operating Procedures for the project management through the design, implementation and closure stages
[Added: 2019/01/03] [Last Updated: 2019/12/01]
M&E Associate, SDU Unit 2019/12 Completed CO has developed and launched the SOPs on the project implementation cycle reinforced based on the PPM reforms and POPP. SOP adequately articulates the role and the procedures for M&E and RBM use in the project management. History
Maintenance of the practice of M&E trainings for the projects staff for M&E programming and implementation in the projects.
[Added: 2019/01/03] [Last Updated: 2019/12/01]
M&E Associate, SDU Unit 2019/12 Completed CO has developed and launched the SOPs on the project implementation cycle reinforced based on the PPM reforms and POPP. SOP adequately articulates the role and the procedures for M&E and RBM use in the project management. History
Introduce and maintain the exchange of the best M&E and RBM practices among the programme and projects i.e.project document development, report writing, presentation of the project results to the national partners.
[Added: 2019/01/03] [Last Updated: 2019/12/01]
M&E Associate, SDU Unit 2019/12 Completed CO reinforced the knowledge sharing practice in M&E and RBM in CO through the presentations of the projects best practices at all staff meetings as well as the Units meetings. CO regularly circulates the best samples of the reports and presentations among the projects for a wide use. History
2. Recommendation:

Positioning and Resource Mobilization

In terms of positioning, the CO should continue to consolidate its position in the areas of biodiversity and natural resources, climate change and energy efficiency, and waste and water management. These are areas where UNDP Kazakhstan has already positioned itself well and is quite competitive. The DRR sector could offer opportunities for further work, if funding will be available. Furthermore, one cross-cutting issue with which the sector should be engaged more actively is the Sustainable Development Goals. Work on the SDGs should be coordinated closely between the sectors, but the E&E sector can play a much bigger role. Potential work the E&E sector could engage in includes the incorporation of SDGs in strategic documents and policies, establishing national targets and baselines to measure progress, supporting the distribution of responsibilities among government institutions, establishing data and monitoring systems that support SDGs, and assisting with reporting nationally and internationally. Overall, the E&E sector is well positioned to support through the SDG process the mainstreaming of the environmental concerns into the country’s legal and policy framework and assist the government in further implementing the concept of Green Economy.

The highest priority for the CO in the area of E&E now is the mobilization of funding. Ongoing efforts with traditional donors which as GEF and the EU should continue, although the amount of financing expected from these sources will continue to decline. With regards to the EU, the CO should undertake a more systematic assessment and identification of opportunities by researching what the EU is planning for Kazakhstan.  In this context, the CO could launch a more organized process of exploration concerning all sectors and involving UNDP’s representation in Brussels and New York. As far as non-traditional donors are concerned, UNDP should continue its current efforts at identifying new modes of engagement. The IFIs, in particular, present good potential which the CO should explore by developing innovative mechanisms – such as the management of technical assistance components in the framework of loan agreements. 

Management Response: [Added: 2018/12/27] [Last Updated: 2020/11/30]

The county office accepts the recommendation.

UNDP, in particular SDU unit is included in two working groups (Planet and Prosperity), established by the Prime Minister for attaining SDGs. UNDP is closely working in this area and actively engaging in the work of the working groups. The SDU unit is focusing on diversifying the resource mobilization and partnering with financial institutions such as – IFIs, Government of Kazakhstan, Quazi-State Enterprises, Private Sector (Coca-Cola, Shell), Chambers of Commerce, Korea Forest Service, Governments of Switzerland, Germany, China, Russian Trust Fund, GCF, EU, etc. The most perspective for the SDU today is IFIs such as – World Bank, IsDB, ADB, EBRD, EIB etc. The CO fully agrees with the recommendation on developing innovative financing mechanisms and use UNDP advantages in management of technical assistance components in the framework of loan agreements.

 

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Participation in at least 5 meetings of the working groups – Planet and Prosperity
[Added: 2019/01/03] [Last Updated: 2020/01/02]
SDU Unit 2019/12 Completed UNDP CO participated in 3 meeting on Planet and 2 meetings on Prosperity History
Mobilization of GEF resources – submit at least 3 proposals for GEF financing
[Added: 2019/01/03] [Last Updated: 2020/01/02]
SDU Unit 2019/12 Completed The following proposals were submitted to GEFSec and endorsed : 8 NC, 7 phase SGP , Sustainable Food system History
Mobilization of GCF resources – submit at least 1 full funding proposal for GCF financing
[Added: 2019/01/03] [Last Updated: 2020/01/02]
SDU Unit 2019/12 Completed The concept note on NAP was developed and submitted to GCF History
Mobilization of resources from Government of Kazakhstan – submit at least 1 Government cost-sharing proposal Mobilization of resources from alternative sources of financing – engage with IFIs for potential implementation of TA components and private sector
[Added: 2019/01/03] [Last Updated: 2020/01/02]
SDU Unit 2019/12 Completed 10 proposals were developed and submitted to donors: 4 GovCS: EcoEducation and Turan tiger, DRR and Ecotourism; 3 private sectors: carbon offsets with Bitfury, women’s empowerment in agriculture with GWC, water management with Goal-Waters; 1 EU Swith Asia: value chain in agriculture; 1 BMU: environmental improvement in Aral sea region; 1 KFS – carbon offsets History
3. Recommendation:

Programme Integration

The CO should strengthen integration between sectors by establishing integrated frameworks for project planning and implementation. Governance and diversification activities, especially at the sub-national level, provide the E&E sector with a platform on which to embed environmental and energy efficiency initiatives. In the upcoming CPD, the CO could consider merging E&E and diversification activities, given their complementary nature (depending on whether diversification activities will be active by that time). The CO should also explore the feasibility of integrated work plans elaborated at the regional/local level and matched with the CO’s plan at the national level. Such an area-based approach will enable UNDP to weave more effectively cross-cutting issues (such as energy efficiency, citizen engagement, transparency and accountability, gender equality) into other thematic activities (i.e. community development, service delivery, etc.). Stronger synergies may also be forged with international organizations at the sub-national level, which may also provide increased funding opportunities. UNDP can also support local authorities to facilitate more effectively donor coordination at the sub-national level. A crucial step in achieving a higher level of programme integration and consolidation at that level could be the development of a clearer strategy for how UNDP should structure itself and operate at the sub-national level.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/12/27] [Last Updated: 2020/11/30]

The country office accepts the recommendation.

The experience of Joint Programmes will be used in upcoming CPD planning with focus on integrated approaches on the national level. SDU unit is now exploring new opportunities for regional projects, such as DRR with China, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, replication of Climate Box with Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia and Russia. UNDP Kazakhstan also participates in 2 global projects – 6th National Communication of Biodiversity and BIOFIN. In upcoming new cycle of PFD, CPD and CPAP development the CO will focus on programme integration and consolidation.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Development of synergetic programme activities as part of new PFD, CPD cycles
[Added: 2019/01/03] [Last Updated: 2019/12/01]
SDU and GLD Units, senior management 2020/12 Completed Country office has started to develop CPD 2021-2025 considering the synergetic activities on CO, regional and global level. History
4. Recommendation:

Policy implementation

The CO should further strengthen its focus on implementation, by thinking beyond just the passing of laws and strategies, and considering measures that consolidate organizational structures that will implement those laws and strategies. This includes actions like the creation of organizational structures, staffing organizations and allocating funding for their operations, training management and staff to implement policies, etc. The sector team has already been doing a lot of this, but the point here is to promote a mentality shift in the programme and within the government away from “form” (how a piece of law looks like) to functionality (how a law is implemented and what effects it produces).  From this perspective, it is important that the team consider how the capability of government organizations is built and changes. For this, the CO should develop RBM systems that track implementation parameters linked to functionality and outcomes rather than form and inputs/outputs and assess more rigorously the sustainability of achievements. Project documents should contain clear criteria related to performance based on a strategy for achieving and demonstrating results. Achieving this focus on functionality and outcomes is difficult when considering the short timeframes of UNDP projects, but it is not impossible. What is important is the mentality shift which implies that UNDP staff start designing and implementing projects with these implementation considerations in mind.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/12/27] [Last Updated: 2020/11/30]

The country office accepts the recommendation.

UNDP Kazakhstan recognizes the importance the sustainability of the project results and ensures it through the corporate mechanisms of the project progress monitoring through the entire project cycle such as Quality Assurance Assessment (QAA) of the project progress. Through all the stages the project, the country office places evidenced records of the assessment criteria: strategic direction, relevance, effectiveness, sustainability, exit strategy.

With this the country office will work to strengthen RBM parameters in the projects making putting the functionality of the results and their sustainability at the center of the project design and ensuring the tools for their monitoring and assessement throughout the projects’ cycle.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Reinforcement of M&E and RBM in the country office Standard Operating Procedures for the project management through the design, implementation and closure stages
[Added: 2019/01/03] [Last Updated: 2019/12/01]
M&E Associate, SDU Unit 2019/12 Completed CO has developed and launched the SOPs on the project implementation cycle reinforced based on the PPM reforms and POPP. SOP adequately articulates the role and the procedures for M&E and RBM use in the project management. History
Develop and introduce the project exit strategy focused on the sustainability of the project outcomes as a part of the project document
[Added: 2019/01/03] [Last Updated: 2019/12/01]
M&E Associate, SDU Unit 2019/12 Completed Project are instructed and trained to introduce clearly defined exit strategy at the stage of the ProDoc Design and record it in Quality Assurance Assessment for the Design and Appraisal Stage. The exit strategy should be clearly formulated and discussed with the partners. Records should be taken provided the respective meetings with the partners to discuss the exit strategy took place. History
5. Recommendation:

Co-financing

The CO has had good results when it comes to co-financing. For projects that involve infrastructure investments it is essential to keep pushing for stronger competitive/market mechanisms to ensure the sustainability and scale of initiatives. Overall, the recommendation here is to stay on the same path and not backtrack, because market-based solutions to infrastructure problems are essential for their sustainability. Instead of providing grants, UNDP should keep strengthening incentives that promote access to international financial institutions and banks for finance.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/12/27] [Last Updated: 2020/11/30]

The country office accepts the recommendation.

The CO will further focus on strengthening incentives and continue introduction of innovative financial mechanisms and building enabling environment for promoting access to finance.
 

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Analyze the implemented financial mechanisms for replicability and potential scale-up and improvement in other sectors (green finance development)
[Added: 2019/01/03] [Last Updated: 2020/01/02]
SDU Unit 2019/12 Completed The analysis for the potential replictaion and scale up of the financial mechanisms was completed within Renewable Energy sector History
Development of new outcome indicators in the area of market-based solutions for sustainability of UNDP interventions in the new PFD, CPD cycles.
[Added: 2019/01/03] [Last Updated: 2020/01/02]
SDU Unit and the senior management 2019/12 Completed The new indicators have beed developped for ne CPD 2021-2025. History
6. Recommendation:

Awareness Raising

In the area of awareness raising and information sharing, the CO should reassess its approaches, methods and results more strategically. This is an area where there have been significant shifts in research and practice recently and it is time for UNDP to upgrade its approach. First, the CP should recognize that information sharing and awareness raising are done for a simple reason – to change  behavior. So, when designing  information campaigns and events, it is important to ask what behavior and whose behavior the programme or project is seeking to change. This requires careful thinking about the behavior the programme/project seeks to promote and the agents whose behavior it wants to change. As a next step, it is also important to understand what type of information and what channel of information has the potential to change the identified behavior in the target group. The way the information is packaged matters a lot, but who carries the information and how that person is perceived by the target group matters even more. In this sense, it is important to understand whose opinion matters for the target group and how that opinion can be constructed and used to influence behavior. It is also important to recognize that individuals operate in a social environment and that human behavior is largely influenced by social norms set by the community in which an individual embedded. So, to change an individual’s behavior, it is important to understand the prevailing social norms in his/her community and the factors that shape those social norms. This is something that the CO could examine a bit more closely in the context of the development of the new CPD and new projects.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/12/27] [Last Updated: 2020/11/30]

The country office accepts the recommendation.

 

UNDP Kazakhstan has been actively communicating the project success stories inside and outside UNDP using various mass media tools.

Anyhow the country office sees the need to strengthen communications and advocacy for development initiatives putting in the center raising the awareness and information sharing to trigger the behavioral change.

UNDP will take the best use of new PPM which puts partnerships, resource mobilization, and communications at the center of UNDP programming efforts  to work with new partners and mobilize financing.

 

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
To elaborate and implement Partnerships and Communications Strategy and Action Plan (PCAP) for the new CPD cycle
[Added: 2019/01/03] [Last Updated: 2019/12/01]
Communications Officer, SDU Unit 2020/12 Completed CO has started to work at the Partnerships and Communications Strategy and Action Plan (PCAP) for the new CPD cycle 2021-2025 which is due to be submitted in mid of 2021 History

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