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:
No
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 624
Download document UNDP Strengthening LMAC - Final Report - 20191130.pdf report English 798.60 KB Posted 686
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
1.

Relevance

Relevance: The extent to which the project is consistent with LMAC requirements and the local context and problems. Under this criterion the evaluation should consider, inter alia: • Are the project's methodologies, outputs and results relevant within the framework of the LMAC Mine Action Strategy and its overarching objective of an impact-free country?; • To what extent does the project intervention meet the needs of local mine affected communities and does the intervention align with national priorities?; • Has the project been able to assess and address the institutional needs and priorities, including the context of emerging development priorities and changing requirements?; • To what extent were the project implementation modalities suitable to strengthen the institution and enhance its capacity, including the extent of support provided?; • Was the project timeframe (for each result) reasonable to achieve the outputs and outcomes?; • Did the project promote the principles of gender equality, human rights-based approach, and conflict sensitivity? 


Tag: Mine Action Relevance Gender Equality Women's Empowerment Human rights Programme/Project Design Project and Programme management Capacity Building Refugees Vulnerable

2.

Effectiveness

Effectiveness: The extent to which planned UNDP project results have been achieved, including analysis of principal factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the objectives. Under this criterion the evaluation should consider, inter alia:

• To what extent are the objectives and results likely to be achieved by end of December 2019?

• What have been the main challenges faced by the project and how has LMAC sought to overcome them?

• What were the major factors influencing the achievement (or non-achievement) of the LMAC project objectives?

• Has the LMAC systematically included knowledge management (evaluations, reviews, etc.) for relevant projects during project implementation?

• To what extent has the project been successful in establishing partnerships with key stakeholders (including private sector), especially through coordination mechanisms?

• Has the project managed risks effectively? Refer to the risk analysis matrix as part of the project document and how it was put into action.

• To what extent have the results at the outcome and outputs levels benefitted women and men equitably and to what extent have marginalised groups benefited?


Tag: Mine Action Effectiveness Gender Equality Women's Empowerment Knowledge management Monitoring and Evaluation Partnership Risk Management Country Government Capacity Building Private Sector Refugees Vulnerable

3.

Efficiency

Efficiency: The extent to which resources or inputs were converted to results economically? Under this criterion the evaluation should consider, inter alia:

• Were project activities cost efficient?

• To what extent has the project been effective in avoiding duplication of funding? How has coordination with different actors contributed to this?

• Were project annual outputs achieved on time?


Tag: Efficiency Human and Financial resources Operational Efficiency

4.

Sustainability

Sustainability: The extent to which the project benefits will continue even after the project is concluded and the principal factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the project sustainability. Under this criterion the evaluation should consider, inter alia:

• What is the likelihood that the benefits that resulted from UNDP interventions continue after the project completion?; • What were the major factors influencing the achievements or non-achievements of the interventions sustainability?; • How will concerns for gender equality, human rights and human development be taken forward by primary stakeholders? 

The rationale for the civilian posts varied slightly. The evaluation examined each of the rationales:

• IMSMA positions. These positions are best filled by specialised IT personnel, unlikely to be assigned to these roles by the military. Rotation requires training new staff each time.

• CLO positions. These positions required prompt daily mobility, without delay waiting for formal order of movement. Furthermore, the role is primarily for liaison with community members, who more easily establish rapport with another civilian.

• QA positions. These positions are best filled by experienced mine action field personnel. Rotation requires training new staff each time. However, QA/QC procedures and practice are well established and with clear SOPs this should not be a significant problem. Past support in this area was important, but it is no longer necessary.LMAC is part of the LAF and as such is sustainable. The relevant questions are first whether the LMAC functions that were strengthened during Phase IV are sustainable at the quality reached and second whether continuing improvement will occur autonomously. 


Tag: Mine Action Sustainability Gender Equality Human rights Human and Financial resources Knowledge management Oversight Donor Data and Statistics Refugees Vulnerable

5.

Relevance (Continuation from Finding 1)

Result #1 UNDP project staff included three Community Liaison Officers (CLOs). All three have worked in mine action for over 15 years and provide institutional memory regarding hazards and demining efforts. The CLOs provide LMAC with civilian representatives to meet with community members and leaders. LMAC has found that local people typically have more open discussion with civilian CLOs than with a uniformed member of the military. CLOs are able to move more freely, without the travel authorizations required by the military. The CLOs provide input to tasking, progress monitoring, completion and handover. They respond to civilian reports of suspected hazardous objects as well as to all accidents and victims. While all of their work benefits from the civilian nature of the CLOs, perhaps the key role for which the civilian status is most important is for dealing with community members when there is a mine accident or explosive hazards have been identified. If there is a civilian available to respond to these situations, they can also provide other CLO support. This is one of the roles for which LMAC access to civilian posts is very important.


Tag: Mine Action Efficiency Relevance Operational Efficiency Policies & Procedures Results-Based Management Capacity Building

6.

Effectiveness (Continuation from Finding 2)

• Result #2 - MRE. The solution to ensure nationwide mine risk education recognized in the Lebanon MAS 2011-2020 is to incorporate MRE into the national school curriculum. While the overall review of the national curriculum is politically fraught and unlikely to occur in the near future, UNDP advocacy with the Ministry of Education to take the leading role in MRE outreach is important, but is part of overall partnership, independent of the specific position. Based on training and materials provided through the MRE Steering Committee, MRE has been incorporated into the two-week “health topic” which is provide by special instructors who travel to all schools. Furthermore, while there have been many MRE efforts, there is still a need to determine “what works” and “what does not work” – the need for which was identified in previous evaluations in the Milestone reviews and other evaluations. UNDP project staff have assisted the meetings and reporting of the MRE Steering Committee but have not played a technical role in MRE. While such a secretariat support role is useful for the Steering Committee, it does not warrant further UNDP input. UNDP support to LMAC in development of pilot EORE project for Syrian refugees is a useful development in the context of changing regional circumstances and needs, although it does not address the essential role of the Ministry of Education in response to the national MRE requirements.


Tag: Mine Action Effectiveness Human rights Knowledge management Oversight Partnership Policies & Procedures Disabilities Jobs and Livelihoods Institutional Strengthening

7.

Sustainability (Continuatio from Finding 4)

• MRE and MVA positions. These positions provide useful support to the LMAC officers responsible for the respective areas, but they did not play any significant role with regard to the national government implementation of already identified policies. Advocacy for those changes is an important component of UNDP management support and partnership with LMAC, but the specific project positions are not strategically important.

• Radio operator. There is no clear rationale for continuation of UNDP civilian function in the radio operations room.

• General partnership and management support. UNDP management level partnership with LMAC remains important to ensure linkage with donors, parliamentarians, UN-system and private sector. Partnership remains important for connection to relevant best practice experience developed in other programmes, including as a channel to bring that expertise to LMAC through short-term consultancies and field visits.

The degree of sustainability of the LMAC strengthening brought about with the support of the EUfunded UNDP project varies significantly according to the Result.

 • Result #1 – Document and prioritize clearance operations and socio-economic impact. This result is supported by the IMSMA clerk and Community Liaison Officers. As described earlier, LMAC capacity has been strengthened, but will deteriorate without external support. This will remain problematic until such time as LMAC can directly hire civilians for these functions. There has been significant strengthening of collaborative work between LMAC and demining operators, which UNDP supports. To the extent this is passed forward during rotations of each new Director and Head of Operations, it will be sustained. Further work is required to reassess the results of past priority setting and revise prioritization for the current context.


Tag: Sustainability Gender Mainstreaming Human rights Human and Financial resources Partnership Disabilities Jobs and Livelihoods Institutional Strengthening Private Sector Vulnerable

Recommendations
1

Recommendations regarding future LMAC requirements and potential UNDP support

The 2018 LMAC Annual Report notes two challenges: fundraising for land release (resource mobilization for INGO operators) and maintaining institutional support (with expected end of EU and UNDP support by end 2019). “LMAC is still in need of institutional support whether it is through the enhancement of information management, donor coordination, reporting and fundraising or capacity building in particular to issues related to IED whether it is NMAS chapter MRE, Clearance, Quality Assurance/Control or MVA.” The evaluation shares the LMAC summary of the challenges faced and identifies below specific short and medium-term support required by LMAC. These requirements are presented to LMAC, UNDP and interested donors for discussion to determine which are priority for LMAC and of interest to donors for support in the coming phase.

Operations – Improved evidence of contamination enables LMAC to prioritize and task demining operators to efficiently address socio-economic impact of landmines and cluster munitions 

Recommendation 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

Recommendations regarding future LMAC requirements and potential UNDP support

The 2018 LMAC Annual Report notes two challenges: fundraising for land release (resource mobilization for INGO operators) and maintaining institutional support (with expected end of EU and UNDP support by end 2019). “LMAC is still in need of institutional support whether it is through the enhancement of information management, donor coordination, reporting and fundraising or capacity building in particular to issues related to IED whether it is NMAS chapter MRE, Clearance, Quality Assurance/Control or MVA.” The evaluation shares the LMAC summary of the challenges faced and identifies below specific short and medium-term support required by LMAC. These requirements are presented to LMAC, UNDP and interested donors for discussion to determine which are priority for LMAC and of interest to donors for support in the coming phase.

Operations – Improved evidence of contamination enables LMAC to prioritize and task demining operators to efficiently address socio-economic impact of landmines and cluster munitions 

Recommendation 2: The IMSMA database will remain essential for long-term; support is important until qualified LMAC civilian staff take over. Currently the database provides essential support to strategic planning, priority setting, tasking and handover of completed tasks. It is the basis for recording progress made and projection of remaining contamination and would benefit from regular non-technical survey (NTS). Overtime, errors accumulate in any database; thorough review and cleanup should be conducted periodically to remove duplicates, overlapping records and other anomalies. The review should start from the results of cleaning done as part of the IMSMA conversion and also consider operator databases to identify any anomalies for reconciliation. In the future the database will be essential for the residual risk phase, providing the record of past contamination and clearance. This will be important for support to development actors – public and private – to understand presence or absence of risk on land to be used for infrastructure or other public or private development. UNDP should work with the government and the international community to ensure any support necessary to maintain the improved database to be useful for future development investments. 

3

Recommendations regarding future LMAC requirements and potential UNDP support

The 2018 LMAC Annual Report notes two challenges: fundraising for land release (resource mobilization for INGO operators) and maintaining institutional support (with expected end of EU and UNDP support by end 2019). “LMAC is still in need of institutional support whether it is through the enhancement of information management, donor coordination, reporting and fundraising or capacity building in particular to issues related to IED whether it is NMAS chapter MRE, Clearance, Quality Assurance/Control or MVA.” The evaluation shares the LMAC summary of the challenges faced and identifies below specific short and medium-term support required by LMAC. These requirements are presented to LMAC, UNDP and interested donors for discussion to determine which are priority for LMAC and of interest to donors for support in the coming phase.

Operations – Improved evidence of contamination enables LMAC to prioritize and task demining operators to efficiently address socio-economic impact of landmines and cluster munitions 

Recommndation 3: 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.

4

MRE – Impacted communities are empowered to deal with the residual risk of mines

Recommendation 4: UNDP should work with UN family and international community to advocate with the Ministry of Education and Higher Education to incorporate MRE into the national curriculum. The MRE Steering Committee should arrange for an evaluation of the MRE efforts in Lebanon, perhaps beginning with the two-week “health topic,” with input from the MRE operators and potentially GICHD or other specialised international support. UNDP should support attention to the differing needs and circumstances of women and men, children and adults, refugees and others. UNDP should work with the UN agencies and international community to support the EORE training under development to reduce the risk to displaced Syrians in Lebanon and when they return home. 

5

MVA – Victims are enabled to socially and economically integrate into their communities

Recommendation 5: UNDP should continue its lobbying efforts with Parliament and ministries for implementation of law 220/2000 to ensure a general improvement for all persons with disabilities including mine victims. UNDP should ensure attention to different situations of women and men, girls and boys. UNDP should follow-up with employers who may have persons with disabilities in their work force in order to seek their involvement as champions for implementation of the law 220/2000. Specific studies that would be valuable to conduct at this time include: (a) type and extent of employment of mine victims in Lebanon; and (b) survey of mine victims regarding their needs and services received considering Law 220/2000. Both studies should consider gender and age.

6

LMAC meets national, regional and international obligations and opportunities

Recommendation 6: 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

7

LMAC meets national, regional and international obligations and opportunities

Recommendation 7: 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.

8

LMAC meets national, regional and international obligations and opportunities

Recommendation 8: Resource mobilization for operational partners depends on the image and enabling environment provided by the quality of the LMAP and of LMAC management, together with specific proposals put forward by the INGOs. The single most important statement the government could make to mobilize more resources would be to accede to the APMBC. UNDP should support LMAC to ensure the enabling environment for operator resource mobilization through:

• Clear realistic national mine action strategy

• Transparent priority setting, including consideration of community socio-economic impact

• Transparent reporting and treaty compliance

• Recognition of operator role in LMAC reports

• Advocacy for accession to the APMBC

9

LMAC meets national, regional and international obligations and opportunities

Recommendation 9: 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. 

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