LMAC Support Project

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2017-2021, Lebanon
Evaluation Type:
Project
Planned End Date:
11/2019
Completion Date:
12/2019
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
10,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document 98899-LMAC-evaluation-Project-TOR-Final.pdf tor English 475.05 KB Posted 80
Download document UNDP Strengthening LMAC - Final Report - 20191130.pdf report English 798.60 KB Posted 74
Title LMAC Support Project
Atlas Project Number: 00094820
Evaluation Plan: 2017-2021, Lebanon
Evaluation Type: Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 12/2019
Planned End Date: 11/2019
Management Response: Yes
UNDP Signature Solution:
  • 1. Poverty
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
  • 1. Output 3.1.1 Core government functions and inclusive basic services4 restored post-crisis for stabilisation, durable solutions to displacement and return to sustainable development pathways within the framework of national policies and priorities
SDG Goal
  • Goal 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere
SDG Target
  • 1.4 By 2030, ensure that all men and women, in particular the poor and the vulnerable, have equal rights to economic resources, as well as access to basic services, ownership and control over land and other forms of property, inheritance, natural resources, appropriate new technology and financial services, including microfinance
Evaluation Budget(US $): 10,000
Source of Funding: Project
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 23,000
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders: Army, NGOs, MoSA, LMAC
Countries: LEBANON
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1

UNDP should continue to provide specific support to efforts to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the national demining programme based on engagement between LMAC and operators, including in context of LMAC rotation.  Specific studies that would be valuable to conduct include: (a) review of past prioritization methodologies (LIS 2004 and LMAC 2011) and the extent to which prioritized communities and tasks have been resolved; (b) revision of current prioritization methodology to reflect changes on the ground and socio-economic impact of hazards on communities; (c) assessment of the efficiency improvements from NMAS revision; and (d) review of post-clearance impact monitoring and reporting.

2

UNDP should support LMAC to develop a residual response mechanism pilot based on current CLO rapid response experience.  Rapid response is triggered by learning of new incident/victim or reported finding of ERW, with immediate response by CLOs.  Issues to be considered include whether this should be done by current CLOs or by personnel provided through NGO partners and whether in the future the function should be transitioned to military or police vs continue with civilian personnel in LMAC posts.

3

LMAC will continue to require support to engage with donors, UN agencies, Parliamentarians, and the private sector. UNDP should maintain its strategic partnership with LMAC, which provides important benefits for engagement with the national and international community. As part of the partnership, UNDP should assist LMAC to strengthen communication with stakeholders:

  • LMAC-donors (twice annual meeting of ISG; alternate quarters with MAF)
  • LMAC-donors and operators (twice annual Mine Action Forum)
  • LMAC-operators (two to four meetings annually of TWG)
  • Clear Transparency and Annual Reports
4

UNDP should support LMAC in development and negotiation of an exit strategy for international assistance.  The exit strategy should present the target capabilities for LMAC to operate without further institutional support.  It should recognize that LMAC will continue to require outside civilians to support the non-traditional roles required for a national mine action center until it is able to recruit its own civilian staff for these positions.   It should identify support to LMAC and the national mine action programme that may be necessary even after other requirements have been met.  The exit strategy should be agreed with the principal donors supporting mine action in Lebanon.

5

Resource mobilization for UNDP continuation – for which LMAC expressed strong interest – has not been a major issue in recent years, thanks to the on-going EU commitment.  Going forward, LMAC request to continue its partnership with UNDP would benefit from high level government expression of support for continued UNDP work with LMAC .

1. Recommendation:

UNDP should continue to provide specific support to efforts to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the national demining programme based on engagement between LMAC and operators, including in context of LMAC rotation.  Specific studies that would be valuable to conduct include: (a) review of past prioritization methodologies (LIS 2004 and LMAC 2011) and the extent to which prioritized communities and tasks have been resolved; (b) revision of current prioritization methodology to reflect changes on the ground and socio-economic impact of hazards on communities; (c) assessment of the efficiency improvements from NMAS revision; and (d) review of post-clearance impact monitoring and reporting.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/09]

UNDP has asked for a 6 moth no cost extension. As part of the request we stated that we will be hiring a consultant that will produce a clear methodology (revamp) for prioritizing the demining tasks. 

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Consultant recruited for revising the prioritization methodologies
[Added: 2019/12/09]
UNDP CO 2020/10 Initiated
2. Recommendation:

UNDP should support LMAC to develop a residual response mechanism pilot based on current CLO rapid response experience.  Rapid response is triggered by learning of new incident/victim or reported finding of ERW, with immediate response by CLOs.  Issues to be considered include whether this should be done by current CLOs or by personnel provided through NGO partners and whether in the future the function should be transitioned to military or police vs continue with civilian personnel in LMAC posts.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/09]

In partnership with LMAC and GICHD, the issue of residual risk and response has been agreed to be tackled by GICHD as part of their ongoing work with LMAC.

Key Actions:

3. Recommendation:

LMAC will continue to require support to engage with donors, UN agencies, Parliamentarians, and the private sector. UNDP should maintain its strategic partnership with LMAC, which provides important benefits for engagement with the national and international community. As part of the partnership, UNDP should assist LMAC to strengthen communication with stakeholders:

  • LMAC-donors (twice annual meeting of ISG; alternate quarters with MAF)
  • LMAC-donors and operators (twice annual Mine Action Forum)
  • LMAC-operators (two to four meetings annually of TWG)
  • Clear Transparency and Annual Reports
Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/10]

UNDP will continue to organize with LMAC the Mine Action Forum twice a year as well as support in organizing the technical working group (TWG) on quarterly basis.

Key Actions:

4. Recommendation:

UNDP should support LMAC in development and negotiation of an exit strategy for international assistance.  The exit strategy should present the target capabilities for LMAC to operate without further institutional support.  It should recognize that LMAC will continue to require outside civilians to support the non-traditional roles required for a national mine action center until it is able to recruit its own civilian staff for these positions.   It should identify support to LMAC and the national mine action programme that may be necessary even after other requirements have been met.  The exit strategy should be agreed with the principal donors supporting mine action in Lebanon.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/10]

 As part of the no cost extension, a consultant will be hired to develop with LMAC the exist strategy for international assistance.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Consultant recruited for the development of exit strategey
[Added: 2019/12/10]
UNDP CO 2020/10 Initiated
5. Recommendation:

Resource mobilization for UNDP continuation – for which LMAC expressed strong interest – has not been a major issue in recent years, thanks to the on-going EU commitment.  Going forward, LMAC request to continue its partnership with UNDP would benefit from high level government expression of support for continued UNDP work with LMAC .

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/10]

UNDP has secured funds from for 2020 and is in discussions with other donors for support running from late 2020 till 2024.

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