Success message
error message
warn message
Economic Empowerment Programme
Commissioning Unit: Kenya
Evaluation Plan: 2014-2018
Evaluation Type: Project
Completion Date: 12/2016
Unit Responsible for providing Management Response: Kenya
Documents Related to overall Management Response:
 
1. Recommendation:

The current outputs should be redefined with a view of reducing them into a few interventions which can have a long-term impact and can be achieved within the remaining one and half years more specifically 1.1.1(b), 1.2.1(g), 2.1.1, 2.2.2 (b) and 2.2.3 (d). 

Management Response: [Added: 2017/01/01]

Noted and agreed: The project acknowledges the need to review the outputs considering the remaining period of the project, support through devolved units and factoring in estimated resources that may be available for the remaining period.

Key Actions:

2. Recommendation:

In order to benefit from the gains made through EEP so far, it is advisable for the IP to take the lead to provide a Project Coordinator who will perform the role spelt out in paragraph 4.2.10 of the PRODOC with an office preferably at the Ministry of Devolution and Planning.

Management Response: [Added: 2017/01/01]

Noted and Agreed: This is a great milestone towards ensuring that project activities and support is well mainstreamed with the government programmes and thus ensure continuity and sustainability after project period. UNDP has already initiated this process and as of now, the IP (Ministry of Devolution and Planning0 has seconded an officer to the Project coordination office to provide project implementation support. UNDP will hold discussions with the IP and explore possibility of having a full time GoK seconded Project Coordinator.

Key Actions:

3. Recommendation:

A forum should be created for Responsible Partners whose contribution is still relevant in the implementation of the remaining programme activities once in a quarter to review achievements and prepare quarterly work plan for the next quarter.  Where a Responsible Partner is engaged to implement some project activities, formal agreements should be made between the Implementing Partner and the Responsible Partners as stipulated in paragraph 4.2.8 of PRODOC.

Management Response: [Added: 2017/01/01]

The quarterly meetings for the technical team during which all Responsible Parties are expected to be represented provides for this forum. However, it is noted that there is need to ensure effective participation and presentation by all and UNDP and the IP shall take lead on this. The absence of formal agreements between the IP and the Responsible parties is well noted. The need for these agreements is well noted in the Project Document and UNDP shall bring this to the attention of the IP and advice as recommended.

Key Actions:

4. Recommendation:

The Project Board should review the strategy of establishing county Biashara Centres and the One Stop Investment Centres considering the high initial capital for providing the infrastructure and competent personnel.

Management Response: [Added: 2017/01/01]

Noted and Agreed: A review meeting with the IP, Kenya Investment Authority, County Governments and the Private Sector through representation by the Kenya National Chamber of Commerce and Industry shall be held and the strategy for establishing Business Centres revised. However, for the One Stop Centre (OSC) the government has allocated financial resources for its establishment and operationalization, with UNDP providing technical support on a need basis. The OSC shall serve as a national centre for promoting investment.

Key Actions:

5. Recommendation:

As part of an exit strategy and sustainability it is important for the Implementing Partner to initiate institutionalization strategies guided by MOUs with county governments for purposes of setting a uniform approach of ownership and leadership.

Management Response: [Added: 2017/01/01]

UNDP is a signatory of the United Nations Development

Framework (UNDAF) through which support to national government is provided, and thus will not need to sign MoUs with each specific county Government. However, the need for reviewing the exit strategy and ensuring sustainability is noted and a framework for sustainability and exit shall be discussed during the review meeting (refer management response under item 4), and implementation fast-tracked.

Key Actions:

6. Recommendation:

For the period 2017 to 2018, quarterly work plans should be prepared following the standard project logical framework which includes clearly indicates: (1) objectively verifiable indicators of achievement; (2) sources and means of verification; and (3) assumptions.

Management Response: [Added: 2017/01/01]

Noted and partly agreed: All Workplans and progress reports are prepared using the standard UNDP templates. However, the need to ensure verifiable indicators is well noted and will be acted upon as recommended.

Key Actions:

7. Recommendation:

There is also need for the project to broaden the knowledge management products including establishing a comprehensive documentation management system which will make it easy to disseminate information partners and general public.

Management Response: [Added: 2017/01/01]

Noted and Agreed: Project lacks a comprehensive documentation system and this will be acted upon as recommended.

Key Actions:

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