- Evaluation Plan:
- 2017-2022, Gambia
- Evaluation Type:
- Outcome
- Planned End Date:
- 06/2020
- Completion Date:
- 05/2021
- Status:
- Completed
- Management Response:
- No
- Evaluation Budget(US $):
- 40,000
Midterm Outcome evaluation of the Environment and Resilience development
| Document | Type | Language | Size | Status | Downloads |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 TOR Final Environment and Resilient Development outcome evaluation (003).docx.pdf |
tor | English | 668.66 KB | Posted | 919 |
| Outcome Evaluation.Environment and Resilient Development.pdf |
report | English | 1640.50 KB | Posted | 945 |
| Title | Midterm Outcome evaluation of the Environment and Resilience development | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atlas Project Number: | 00074214 | |||||||||
| Evaluation Plan: | 2017-2022, Gambia | |||||||||
| Evaluation Type: | Outcome | |||||||||
| Status: | Completed | |||||||||
| Completion Date: | 05/2021 | |||||||||
| Planned End Date: | 06/2020 | |||||||||
| Management Response: | Yes | |||||||||
| Focus Area: |
|
|||||||||
| Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021) |
|
|||||||||
| SDG Goal |
|
|||||||||
| SDG Target |
|
|||||||||
| Evaluation Budget(US $): | 40,000 | |||||||||
| Source of Funding: | GEF | |||||||||
| Evaluation Expenditure(US $): | 25,000 | |||||||||
| Joint Programme: | No | |||||||||
| Joint Evaluation: | No | |||||||||
| Evaluation Team members: |
|
|||||||||
| GEF Evaluation: | No | |||||||||
| Key Stakeholders: | ||||||||||
| Countries: | GAMBIA |
| Lessons | |
|---|---|
| Findings |
| Recommendations | |
|---|---|
| 1 | Political economy analysis can contribute to addressing such deep-seated problems by revealing the informal forces, power relations and reciprocal obligation that impede development, and it can help to pinpoint where constructive change might be most feasible and thereby inform how best to position development assistance. Yet there was no evidence in any of the project documents we reviewed or in our discussions with project or Country Office staff that these matters were of sufficient significance (or were sufficiently understood) even to warrant mention let alone serious discussion or analysis. It is believed that not recognising the significance of these matters, or turning a blind eye to them, is detrimental to project performance and that this is a serious defect of project design, project implementation, and project management that should be rectified as soon as practicable. |
| 2 | Project design. interested development partners should be invited to become formally involved in the design process at an early stage. Before approval, project documents should be subject to review by, preferably, two independent referees of international standard in the field(s) covered by the project, one appointed by UNDP and the other by the IP(s) involved
|
| 3 | Human resource management: Emphasis should be placed on developing selection and remuneration systems that optimise the selection of high-quality professional project staff. After project design, this is the most critical contributor to project performance. However, management capability is also extremely important and should be given greater attention in the selection of team leaders or project managers; it should also be part of the professional development of Country Office staff. |
| 4 | Greater attention should be given to the timely production of meaningful, and sufficiently testing, but more on realistic and feasible, outcomes, outputs and indicators. It must be understood and accepted that the impacts of the programme under review need a longer time to be realized including the climate-friendly SLM aspects for crop production |
| 5 | Aligning projects with government plans could avoid duplication of efforts. However, future UNDP interventions should focus on areas where the government has clear technical, human, and financial shortfalls. Most of the environment and biodiversity programme components lacked the experience or the resources needed to make a difference. However, interventions that address the real capacity needs of the government such as smart agriculture/conservation farming, single model farmer package, and to some extent village banking are innovative in nature and results in clear impacts. |
| 6 | More effort in resource mobilization: the resources mobilized for the Environment and Resilient Development projects were limited as a result of which the effort of the agency appeared to be scattered and small. UNDP can achieve maximum impact by mobilizing resources for well-articulated priority areas. This requires strengthening the capacity of UNDP in project formulation and implementation with the use of more national experts. |
| 7 | The need for continuous capacity building: Frequent staff turnover has been cited as a major problem in relation to programmes implemented by the government. Future interventions need to have an inbuilt continuous capacity-building component. Moreover, remarks of none existence of long-term training have been expressed. |
| 8 | Continues support to sustenance of promising projects: Some projects that have shown promising results should be supported for longer term and mechanisms for handover to the government be put in place. |
| 9 | Continues support to the sustenance of promising projects: |
| 10 | UNDP can achieve more impact by testing innovative approaches to problem-solving, steering successful methods/approaches, and devising mechanisms for their scale-up. The approaches used in the PAN conservation farming, coastal beach nourishment, and multifunctional women horticultural gardening have future potential benefits if scaled up |
| 11 | Gender considerations and empowerment: |
| 12 | The need to coordinate with other agencies and development partners: UNDP should work more closely with national and international development partners in programme design and resources mobilization so as to contribute more to bigger interventions and better replications. This becomes increasingly important in the face of looming financial crises that might affect the flow of foreign development assistance to The Gambia. |