Dear all,

We are pleased to present this new issue of the Evaluation E-News featuring the UNDP May Board Meeting, and the new Joint Evaluation of the Role and Contribution of the UN System in the Republic of South Africa . We hope you continue to find this newsletter useful and do let us know what you would also like to see in the future editions.

Saraswathi Menon
Director, Evaluation Office

IN THIS ISSUE

• What EO is doing to support:
• UN Reform and Partnership in Evaluation
• UNEG Annual General Meeting 2009
• Joint Evaluation of the Role and Contribution of the UN System in theRepublic of South Africa
• Accountability and Organizational Learning

Evaluation at the forefront of UNDP
Evaluation of the Third Cooperation of the Arab States 8 Assessment of Development Results (ADR): Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Argentina, Barbados and the OECS, Guatemala and Botswana.

Upcoming reports and Events

Stay tuned for the updated Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluating of Development Report

Supporting UN Reform and Partnership

UNEG Annual General Meeting 2009
The UNEG Annual General Meeting was held from 25-27 March in Nairobi. The UNEG Evaluation Practice Exchange Seminar, an opportunity for UN evaluation professionals to exchange experiences, was held two days prior from 23-24 March with presentations on evaluation experiences from the field, knowledge management and information echnology, strengthening evaluation methods and tools and, good practice guidelines on evaluation follow up and human rights and gender equity in evaluation. The main decisions taken at the AGM included the reelection of Saraswathi Menon, Director, UNDP Evaluation Office, as UNEG Chair; the election of Caroline Heider, Director of Evaluation, WFP as UNEG vice-Chair; approval of the revised UNEG Principles of Working Together and the establishment of seven UNEG Task Forces (Country Level Evaluation, Evaluation Quality Standards, Evaluation of
the Evaluation Function, Human Rights and Gender Quality, Impact Evaluation, Training and the Evaluation Practice Exchange Seminar 2010).

Joint Evaluation of the Role and Contribution of the UN System in the Republic of South Africa
In June, the Joint Evaluation of the Role and Contribution of the UN System in the Republic of South Africa was published and made available on the UNEG website. Conducted between September 2008 and March 2009, the evaluation assesses the relevance and effectiveness of cooperation between South Africa and the UN system within the three-tier strategic policy priorities of the country: a better South Africa, a better Africa, and a better world. The evaluation is unique for a number of reasons:

• The Government of South Africa expressed the will to develop a policy dialogue to strengthen its partnership with the UN based on evaluative evidence.
• For the UN system, this was the first time that the UN system as a whole has been jointly evaluated at the country level, rather than on an agency by agency basis.
• Building trust and sharing the will to improve based on lessons from past experience were essential aspects of the exercise. All important decisions were made by consensus.
• The evaluation demonstrated the need for champions, and there was clear leadership on both sides of the partnership.

Key to the success of the joint evaluation was the fact that it was conducted by a highly competent and independent evaluation team who had no conflict of interest with the UN system or the South African Government. The Joint Evaluation Management Group, comprising evaluation specialists from South Africa and the UN Evaluation Group, was also independent from line management functions on either side.

Supporting Accountability and Organizational Learning

Evaluation at the forefront of UNDP
The Annual Report on Evaluation 2008 was presented at the Executive Board meeting on May 26-June 3 2009. The Board’s decisions strongly affirmed the critical importance of evaluation for decision-making and improved accountability for development results putting evaluation at the forefront of UNDP.

The UNDP Evaluation Office submits every year, the Annual Report on Evaluation to the Executive Board. The Annual Report on Evaluation presents information on evaluation coverage; compliance; quality; resources; capacity and the way evaluations are used, with the aim to increase accountability and results based culture across the organization. Based on the information presented in the report, the Executive Board is mandated to decide on the way forward concerning the evaluation function across UNDP and its associated funds and programmes.

This year, the Board reiterated the critical importance of evaluation for decision-making, and added an important decision with respect to resources for decentralized outcome evaluations: the possibility to use programme resources to fund decentralized outcome evaluations. During the past years, country offices were concerned on the push from headquarters to comply with the need to increase the quality and number of decentralized outcome evaluations, with no specific resources available. With this decision, country offices will have a real opportunity to conduct quality outcome evaluations with increased available resources, and use them to distill recommendations and lessons learned for future programming cycles.

Capacity development continues at the front of UNDP with the Board’s decision to place monitoring and evaluation capacity at the country office and national level on a higher priority level. The Board emphasized the need to strengthen support to monitoring and evaluation capacity development with special focus to regions and areas that
have lower evaluation coverage and need more resources.

Other decisions include the need for UNDP to improve programme planning and results-based management in order to enhance the design and methodology of decentralized evaluations and the need to improve the submission and tracking of management responses in the Evaluation Resource Center (ERC) to improve accountability and ransparency on evaluation follow-up. In addition, the Board made special reference to encourage collaborative approaches to evaluation including joint evaluations with programme countries and other United Nations organizations while keeping in sight a focus on UNDP accountability. Joint evaluations can benefit both parties, encouraging a culture of sharing best practices, and resources. Finally, the Board is really keen in having UNDP address the issues raised by the evaluations. This decision will help drive the organization towards having a more clear and effective evidence-based learning culture.

Evaluation of the Third Cooperation Framework for Arab States

This evaluation assessed the performance, results and strategic positioning of UNDP’s Regional Cooperation Framework for the Arab States, 2006-2009. The evaluation found that the programme has focused on critical and sensitive issues where the regional approach has been beneficial in advancing the achievement of MDGs in the region. The recommendations emanating from the evaluation highlight a need for a sharpened strategic thrust with clearly defined outcomes aligned with UNDP’s strategic plan. South-South cooperation modalities for transferring knowledge and experiences from country to country should
continue as a basis for the regional cooperation framework

Assessment of Development Results: AfghanistanThe ADR Islamic Republic of Afghanistan covered the period from 2002 to 2008.

From its initial focus on early recovery, the UNDP programme has evolved towards an increasingly substantive contribution to the cause of security and development in Afghanistan. UNDP has increasingly understood the importance of the institutions of democracy, state and rule of law in ensuring a smooth transition process with prospects of long-term peace and development. Yet, not enough attention was paid from an early stage to stimulating and creating conditions and opportunities for sustainable livelihoods and employment creation.

Following the approach of some donors, UNDP has focused on insecure provinces. By doing so, it has not sufficiently demonstrated the development dividend of the peace process in the more secure provinces, which received less attention and resources. While broad national development and poverty reduction strategies have been developed for Afghanistan, no focused strategy on peace-building has been devised by the United Nations or the international cooperation. This could have been a major contribution of UNDP, particularly in an integrated mission setting.

Assessment of Development Results: Bosnia and Herzegovina

The ADR in Bosnia and Herzegovina covered the period from 2001-2008 and offers lessons that can strengthen UNDP programming in Bosnia and Herzegovina as well as contributing to the organization’s effectiveness and accountability. The evaluation found that in the context of transition, UNDP quickly established itself as a capable
and reliable implementing agency for the government as well as donors. In particular, UNDP has contributed to policy development and dialogue, including the incorporation of pro-poor concerns and the Millennium Development Goals into the national development strategy; national human development reports and strategic research on key issues have also been important in informing policy.

Assessment of Development Results: Tajikistan

The ADR in Tajikistan covered the period from 2001-2008 and offers lessons that can strengthen UNDP programming in Tajikistan as well as contributing to the organization’s effectiveness and accountability. The evaluation found that, in the context of transition, UNDP quickly established itself as a capable and reliable implementing agency of the government and donors. UNDP has contributed to policy development and dialogue, and played a key role in incorporating the MDGs and pro-poor concerns into national development planning. UNDP support to infrastructure development has been important in addressing social service needs in rural areas. The contribution of UNDP in developing disaster management policy was found to be noteworthy. One of the key roles UNDP has played in Tajikistan is supporting the government in managing the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. This has contributed to reducing the incidence of malaria and there are important ongoing efforts to minimize the incidence of tuberculosis and risk of HIV. However, the evaluation found that UNDP can play a more proactive role in furthering governance reforms. To maximize results in areas central to the UNDP mandate and build on its comparative advantages, the evaluation recommends that UNDP emphasize policy support and strengthening government systems. As governance reforms and efficient management of environment and energy will continue to be an essential precondition for sustainable development, the evaluation recognizes the importance of the continued engagement of UNDP in priority areas where enhanced national capacity and ownership of development processes can lead to significant results.

Assessment of Development Results (ADR): Uzbekistan

The ADR Uzbekistan covered the period 2000 to mid-2008 and offers lessons that help the detailed design and implementation of the new country programme. It notes that UNDP has made an important contribution to Uzbekistan’s development during this period, a time of rapid change for the country, including the implementation of key reforms, fast economic growth and changes in the country’s relationship with the international community. UNDP has remained
committed to supporting Uzbekistan and has a sound programme, much appreciated by the partner government. The ADR concluded that UNDP has been relevant to Uzbekistan’s priority development needs in order to increase the effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of future interventions, it is important for UNDP to focus on fewer issues (and on those in which it has comparative strengths), and to take a more comprehensive and long-term approach.

Assessment of Development Results (ADR): Argentina

As a middle-income country, Argentina has seen its level of social conditions and poverty fluctuates during the 20th century. Today, the country still faces development challenges as the result of persistent income and regional disparities. Contributing to the country’s national development results, the role of UNDP during the two programming cycles evaluated, 2002-2004 and 2005-2008, focused mainly on achieving the MDGs and poverty reduction, fostering democratic governance and promoting energy and environment for sustainable development. The evaluation found that UNDP was successful in incorporating a culture of dialogue into the country’s different sectors, promoting an increase in knowledge and awareness of human rights, and strengthening capacity at the national, regional and
municipal levels. In the area of poverty reduction, UNDP assumed a coordination and advocacy role providing support to develop key programs in response to the economic crisis of 2001. UNDP was also instrumental in the mainstreaming environmental issues into public policies. The evaluation recognized UNDP’s positioning as a prestigious organization with the potential to bring legitimacy, neutrality, credibility and knowledge into the development process. However, there is still room for improvement in the area of assuring sustainability of benefits and results of the UNDP supported interventions. Two critical lessons learned for UNDP are derived from
the evaluation: the importance of a highly qualified human factor endowment for providing technical assistance in middle-income countries and the need of a strategic cooperation framework for the UN system, even if it is not a corporate requirement, enhances the opportunity for more coherent and effective UN cooperation.

Assessment of Development Results (ADR): Barbados and OECS

The ADR covered the sub-regional programme of the nine member countries of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) and Barbados over the ongoing (2005-2009) and previous (2001-2004) programming cycles. The ADR notes that UNDP is working in a challenging and multifaceted development context, where relatively high levels of gross domestic product per capita and political stability occur side by side with considerable poverty, underemployment, gender and social inequities, institutional capacity weaknesses and vulnerability to risk, including extreme weather events. The ADR concluded that although UNDP has undertaken a subregional programme with a strong profile and reputation it has achieved only moderate progress towards longer-term outcomes. The ADR also found that the UNDP subregional programme had many commendable features and is respected by stakeholders and partners due to its consistent focus on improving human and social development in the Eastern Caribbean.

Assessment of Development Results (ADR): Guatemala

The ADR Republic of Guatemala covered the period from 2002 to 2008. Guatemala has been one of the not-so-frequent cases in which the United Nations closely combined the peace-building mandate of its General Assembly with post-conflict development. As a result, UNDP in Guatemala continues to enjoy high recognition as a neutral agency, a broker and promoter of dialogue on sensitive issues. UNDP has contributed in the areas of governance and crisis prevention and recovery. The record is less strong in the areas of poverty and the environment. Yet with the global economic crisis, poverty and environment are likely to acquire more prominence in the near future and challenge the past orientations of UNDP in these areas. UNDP has been heavily involved in the management of public programmes: this has brought about more impartial, transparent and faster execution. On the other hand, replacing the state’s function may create a risk of perpetuating dependency without promoting long-term capacity of national institutions. During the years 2005-2007, UNDP has been able to rapidly re-adapt and respond to the shifting demands of Government and donors but has not always struck a balance between long-term country development needs and short-term demands and opportunities, leading to a thematic dispersion throughout the programme.

Assessment of Development Results (ADR): Botswana

Botswana’s successful path to development has resulted in it becoming a middle-income country, with one of the highest economic growth rates since it gained independence in 1966. Botswana is widely recognized as lead country in Africa on good governance, and has achieved good progress towards the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). However, the country still needs to diversify its economy reducing the proportion of diamond mining in relation to other sectors of the economy, and translating its diamond wealth into sustainable poverty reduction. Also, the health sector faces big challenges in its policy to reduce HIV/AIDs. The recent evaluation conducted by UNDP that covered the programming cycle of 2003-2008 found that UNDP’s work in Botswana has been overall effective, although the impact has been limited to small number of people. Also, while most of the projects in most practice areas have been efficient, their sustainability remains a concern as it has not always led to national ownership. As opposed to other practice areas, the environment and HIV programmes have been effective in translating the produced outputs into national development results owned by the national stakeholders and the government. On cross-cutting issues, there is still room to improve the strategy and increase the resources for gender equality and mainstreaming. Overall, UNDP work in Botswana is still critical and significant as it addresses the needs of the country, and remains the only active development partner in most areas.

Upcoming Reports and Events

Stay Tuned -- The awaited Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluating for Developing Results will be available in September in its print and online version in English, French and Spanish.

Evaluation Office(EO) Mandate

EO provides systematic assessment of UNDP’s contribution to development results by conducting independent strategic, corporate programme and country-level evaluations. EO is responsible for supporting the Administrator in his accountability function and contributing to organizational learning. EO sets standards, guidelines and systems for knowledge sharing and networking to support the effective implementation of the Executive Board approved evaluation policy (2006) and evaluation capacity development across the organization.

Contact Us
UNDP Evaluation Office (EO)
One United Nations Plaza
DC1-4th Floor
New York, NY 10017

Telephone: (212) 906 5095
Fax: (212) 906 6008/6627
Internet: www.undp.org/eo
Email: evaluation.office@undp.org