Success message
error message
warn message
Evaluation of the 2015-2017 Saemaul Initiative towards Inclusive and Sustainable New Communities
Commissioning Unit:Bureau for Policy and Programme Support
Evaluation Plan:2018-2021
Evaluation Type: Project
Completion Date:11/2018
Unit Responsible for providing Management Response: Bureau for Policy and Programme Support
1. Recommendation:

It is overall strongly recommended that the project should be immediately extended incorporating observations and lessons learned from the evaluation.

It is recommended that the HQ/RO/CO roles are clear with no gaps or overlaps:

  • HQ should be the office overseeing and coordinating at global level without direct implementation engagement and little participation in project activities, apart from global activities;
  • HQ should be the entity conducting the research part of such test/pilot project documenting and sharing the learning of the research/test/piloting part of the project;
  • RO should be the office coordinating regional activities and supervising on day-today issues being familiar with the cultural and political context;
  • RO should be the convener of/or support regional meetings and participate in these;
  • CO should be the overseeing and coordinating office at national level supervising partners with regard to collaboration requirements and procedures and supporting the process as necessary.
  • Sufficient funds and time be allocated for on-site review and evaluation of a possibly second phase.
Management Response: [Added: 2019/01/08] [Last Updated: 2019/01/08]

Management appreciates the recommendation highlighting the need for clear management and coordination structures and a well thought through project design. The evaluation report findings and this recommendation will be taken into consideration in the development of a second phase of the project, should UNDP pursue this, subject to internal capacity and continued availability of donor funding.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1.1 UNDP to consider pursuing a second phase of the project, subject to continued availability of donor funding, and to organizational capacity to resource a project team.
[Added: 2019/01/08]
TBD – subject to situation of SSC portfolio in the new organizational structure (currently being redesigned) 2019/05 Not Initiated
2. Recommendation:

For planning and design, it is recommended that:

  • Projects aiming at changing government and local systems and structures and in addition changing the attitude of a population should plan for a 10 (-13) year project. The full period could be broken down into 3-year phases with clear defined types and level of achievements for each phase as they are designed.
  • Timing of the launch of activities should reflect seasonal activities in government and among stakeholders.
  • Stakeholders suggest:
  • Government institution to lead the implementation of all activities and disburse the project cost to Government or partner organization
  • Reinforced use of knowledge into the planning
  • Capacity building is a key activity when introducing SMU principles.

The DAC definition of capacity building is far wider than just knowledge.There is need for application of a holistic approach encompassing development/adjustment of:

  • Systems
  • Structures
  • Knowledge
  • Skills
  • Adequate number and type of staff
  • Equipment/facilities
  • Psychologically conducive work environment.

A range of methods support such changes:

  • Training/knowledge
  • Hands-on experience/skills
  • Peer Learning
  • Mentoring
  • Twinning
  • Provision of technical staff and secondments – also at devolved and community level.
  • There is strong need for ONE overall log frame when involving several countries, not least when testing principles, as there is need for documenting applicability of each principle and the context in which they are applicable. Systematic reporting on achievements for outputs, outcome and impact for each principle would generate learning making replication be easy.
  • Equipment/facilities
  • Psychologically conducive work environment.

A range of methods support such changes:

  • Training/knowledge
  • Hands-on experience/skills
  • Peer Learning
  • Mentoring
  • Twinning
  • Provision of technical staff and secondments – also at devolved and community level.
  • There is strong need for ONE overall log frame when involving several countries, not least when testing principles, as there is need for documenting applicability of each principle and the context in which they are applicable. Systematic reporting on achievements for outputs, outcome and impact for each principle would generate learning making replication be easy.
Management Response: [Added: 2019/01/08] [Last Updated: 2019/01/08]

UNDP overall concurs with the need for a long-term perspective – including continued funding over extended periods of time – in order to help ensure sustainable outcome level results and to achieve change in terms of perception, culture and systems. To create high quality projects - based on analysis and evidence - UNDP has made guidance available to all programming units on how to develop rigorous theory of changes to identify key risks, solution pathways, stakeholders, based on the comparative advantages of UNDP. Lessons learned from evaluations such as this one also helps feed into the project formulation.

UNDP takes note of the need to strengthen a holistic approach to capacity building, a core objective of the project.

UNDP also concurs with the statement that an overall log frame is needed to help guide the project in achieving its goals and objectives, and to establish efficient monitoring and reporting structures. The project results framework will help assist the definition of the project results to support the planning, management and monitoring of development activities. This is another lesson learned which will be considered during project formulation should there be a second phase.

Should UNDP pursue a second phase of the project, subject to funding availability and capacity to implement, UNDP will review the implications of this recommendation and reflect them accordingly into the results framework(s), as applicable.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
2.1 Should a second phase of the project be pursued, UNDP to reflect the implications of this recommendation into a new results framework(s for the project.
[Added: 2019/01/08]
TBD – subject to situation of SSC portfolio in the new organizational structure (currently being redesigned) 2019/12 Not Initiated
3. Recommendation:

For implementation the following is recommended:

  • The evaluation scorings showed a significant need for detailed communication strategy

The strategy should define:

  • Who should know what – and the purpose
  • Media for sharing (TV, radio, conferences, reports, well-designed printed briefs, short breakfast meetings etc.)
  • Frequency of sharing with each type of stakeholders
Management Response: [Added: 2019/01/08] [Last Updated: 2019/01/08]

BPPS welcomes the recommendation and concurs with the importance of having a clear communication strategy. This will be considered together with the other recommendations when defining the roles and responsibilities, and how to communicate results. A communication strategy will need to be carefully discussed with the implementing stakeholders, national Governments and the Project Board.

UNDP would like to note that implementation of this recommendation is contingent on a continuation of the project.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
3.1 Should a second phase of the project be pursued, UNDP to reflect the implications of this recommendation into a new results framework(s for the project.
[Added: 2019/01/08]
TBD – subject to situation of SSC portfolio in the new organizational structure (currently being redesigned) 2019/12 Not Initiated
4. Recommendation:

Recommendations for project exit include:

  • The negative effect of lack of a project exit strategy was the concern of several stakeholders.  Irrespective of the timeframe there is need for an exit strategy preparing the mind-set of all stakeholders that this is the time for a take-over.

Documents, whether policies, instructions or others cannot replace a planned exit, which is more practical than intellectual.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/01/08] [Last Updated: 2019/01/08]

BPPS appreciates this recommendation and strongly supports the importance of having a clear exit strategy to ensure sustainability of results developed as part of a project.  The exit strategy should be built into the design of the project but remain flexible enough to be modified throughout the project cycle. UNDP will consider this recommendation in line with the established policy and guidance on programme and project management (PPM), and subject to a decision to continue the project.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
4.1 Should a second phase of the project be pursued, UNDP to reflect the implications of this recommendation into a new project document that will incorporate findings from the evaluation on the exit strategy.
[Added: 2019/01/08]
TBD – subject to situation of SSC portfolio in the new organizational structure (currently being redesigned) 2019/12 Not 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