Increasing Border Surveillance Capacity of Borders between Turkey and Greece

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2016-2020, Turkey
Evaluation Type:
Final Project
Planned End Date:
02/2019
Completion Date:
02/2019
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
7,300

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document TOR Greek Border I.pdf tor English 697.82 KB Posted 47
Download document Evaluation Report of Greek Border.pdf report English 1574.56 KB Posted 71
Title Increasing Border Surveillance Capacity of Borders between Turkey and Greece
Atlas Project Number: 00097937
Evaluation Plan: 2016-2020, Turkey
Evaluation Type: Final Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 02/2019
Planned End Date: 02/2019
Management Response: Yes
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
  • 1. Output 3.2.1 National capacities strengthened for reintegration, reconciliation, peaceful management of conflict and prevention of violent extremism in response to national policies and priorities
Evaluation Budget(US $): 7,300
Source of Funding: Project budget
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 7,300
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Mr. Kjell Elefalk Evaluator
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders:
Countries: TURKEY
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1

There is reason to believe that the possibilities of introducing new technology have increased and HR capacity has been strengthened. The foundation is laid in the way the beneficiaries and donors imagined. It would be very unfortunate, and waste of funds, if enough resources were not decided to utilize for phase 2 and the future work.

2 Many good assessments of the project's work have a good basis in that it is supported from the very beginning of beneficiaries, that the goals were clear and that there were two components – both unpretentious and doable, enabled rather qualitative than quantitative delivery of the outcomes. There is every reason to emphasize that the structure of the future work should be similar.
3 An important lesson that has been developed in the course of the Phase I is that the next phase should be characterized by distance (practical) training to optimize the lessons of the first phase.
4 When it comes to evaluating the next phase and future work, it should be emphasized that at the start of the project, the evaluation should be prepared by an evaluation expert with an independent position.
5 There are observed weaknesses of gender mainstreaming in executing of the project. The main reason is the lack of female officers and soldiers. Institutional measures need to be broadened in order to better anchor gender mainstreaming in the long term.
6 The gender targets need to be reflected in formal and informal monitoring and evaluation (M&E), at both institutional and intervention level in the next phase
1. Recommendation:

There is reason to believe that the possibilities of introducing new technology have increased and HR capacity has been strengthened. The foundation is laid in the way the beneficiaries and donors imagined. It would be very unfortunate, and waste of funds, if enough resources were not decided to utilize for phase 2 and the future work.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/06/27]

UNDP had already suggested to include the use of the output of the project, namely Feasibility Report, for the use of high technology training tools, at hand to result in establishment of Distance Learning Technology as a part of Phase II. In this respect Distance Learning Infrastructure will be enhanced in Land Forces Training and Doctrines Command, who has a high level of ownership as also mentioned in the Feasibility Report of the Simulation Based Training Center Moreover, UNDP prepared a concept note for a further possible pipeline project to include more high technology environment to be set up in Land Forces Training and Doctrines Command. This possible pipeline project has been shared with the Main Beneficiary. UNDP will follow up this and further possibilities.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Component II of IBM Phase II Project on Institutional Capacity Building that includes enhancement of Distance Learning Infrastructure Follow-up of possible pipeline project/s with EU for the use of high technology training tools.
[Added: 2019/06/27]
IDG Portfolio 2020/06 Initiated
Component II of IBM Phase II Project on Institutional Capacity Building that includes enhancement of Distance Learning Infrastructure Follow-up of possible pipeline project/s with EU for the use of high technology training tools.
[Added: 2019/06/27]
IDG Portfolio 2020/06 Initiated
2. Recommendation: Many good assessments of the project's work have a good basis in that it is supported from the very beginning of beneficiaries, that the goals were clear and that there were two components – both unpretentious and doable, enabled rather qualitative than quantitative delivery of the outcomes. There is every reason to emphasize that the structure of the future work should be similar.
Management Response: [Added: 2019/06/27]

In terms of quality, UNDP has produced a sustainable and replicable module that will be utilized in the second Phase. However, there was also a good balance between qualitative and quantitative targets/outcomes in the Project. In terms of quantitative results, the Project surpassed its own targets such as the number of trainees, number of study visits. In the second phase, this balance between qualitative and quantitative targets will continue. While Phase II has targets related to numbers, it also has qualitative targets such as integration of learning materials in Land Force’s curriculum.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Close cooperation with Beneficiaries both in planning and implementation of activities. Integration of Lessons Learned from Phase I into Phase II Continuation of the delivery of trainings with minor revisions Sustainable use of Distance Learning Materials as part of the education system of Land Forces
[Added: 2019/06/27]
IDG Portfolio 2020/06 Initiated
3. Recommendation: An important lesson that has been developed in the course of the Phase I is that the next phase should be characterized by distance (practical) training to optimize the lessons of the first phase.
Management Response: [Added: 2019/06/27]

A Feasibility Report has been produced in Phase I of the Project. This report summarizes the necessity for face to face, distance and blended learning besides the use of high technology training tools depending on the peculiarities of the training such as the profile of the trainees and the availability of facilities. In this respect, for being consistent with the Feasibility Report, face to face training method will remain in the curriculum with minor revisions to the training material. In addition, as already argued in the Recommendation I, the distance learning component is added to Phase II with a modified material.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Lessons learned to be reviewed. Curriculum to be reviewed. Training materials to be revised and finalized upon review before and after trainings.
[Added: 2019/06/27]
IDG Portfolio 2020/06 Initiated
4. Recommendation: When it comes to evaluating the next phase and future work, it should be emphasized that at the start of the project, the evaluation should be prepared by an evaluation expert with an independent position.
Management Response: [Added: 2019/06/27]

Under Phase II, another evaluation is going to be conducted at the end of the project which is a common practice in EU Projects. The proposed evaluation suggestions are already included in the activities of the Phase II Project including an evaluation to be conducted at the end of the project. Additionally, all UNDP evaluations are conducted according to UNDP Evaluation Guidelines under the supervision of M&E Analyst which guarantees an independent review of projects.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
ToR of the Phase II independent evaluation
[Added: 2019/06/27]
IDG Portfolio 2020/03 Not Initiated
5. Recommendation: There are observed weaknesses of gender mainstreaming in executing of the project. The main reason is the lack of female officers and soldiers. Institutional measures need to be broadened in order to better anchor gender mainstreaming in the long term.
Management Response: [Added: 2019/06/27]

Due to very difficult geographical and security conditions, the number of female staff for IBM remains limited. However, in the future, if the border service is civilianized and the security besides geographical conditions are improved then there can be a visible increase in the number of female border professionals. UNDP has and will report the lack of female professionals in progress reports to highlight this issue to be ready for a change if the conditions improve.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Notification of the lack of female border professionals in the Progress Reports.
[Added: 2019/06/27]
IDG Portfolio 2020/06 Not Initiated
6. Recommendation: The gender targets need to be reflected in formal and informal monitoring and evaluation (M&E), at both institutional and intervention level in the next phase
Management Response: [Added: 2019/06/27]

The bulk of Phase II activities are trainings to Land Forces Professionals. In line with gender mainstreaming standards, the trainings of Phase II are gender sensitive such as in training the professionals on body search etc..

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Enhancing gender sensitive aspects of training modules
[Added: 2019/06/27]
IDG Portfolio 2020/06 Initiated

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

220 East 42nd Street
20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org