Programme and Project ManagementEvaluationDescription 1.0 Introduction Evaluation provides decision makers and partners with an objective assessment of the organization’s contribution to development results. Evaluation is a judgment made of the relevance, appropriateness, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability of development efforts based on agreed criteria and benchmarks. It involves a rigorous, systematic and objective process in the design, analysis and interpretation of information to answer specific questions. Evaluation is distinct from monitoring, reviews, audit, investigation, and research. Evaluation addresses what works and why, as well as what does not work and unintended outcomes. The information from evaluation supports accountability, inform decision-making and allow UNDP to better manage for development results. Evaluation also improves learning and knowledge for development among UNDP and its partners. Engagement of all key stakeholders will enhance capacity for evaluation as well as its utility. Policy 2.0 Evaluation Policy Evaluation in UNDP is guided by the Executive Board approved Evaluation Policy (2006). As outlined in the following sections, the policy establishes the guiding principles and norms; explains key evaluation concepts; outlines the main organizational roles and responsibilities; defines the types of evaluation covered; and identifies the key elements of a system for learning and knowledge management. It also highlights the capacity and resource requirements to enhance excellence in the development of an evaluation culture and a learning organization. The policy applies to UNDP and its associated funds and programmes (UNIFEM, UNCDF and UNV). 3.0 Guiding principles Evaluations in UNDP are guided by the following guiding principles: Managing for results. Evaluation supports UNDP to manage for results by assessing the extent to which UNDP’s processes, products and services contribute effectively to development results affecting people’s lives. Through this, evaluation highlights the need for quality in the design of programmes so that results are clear, measurable and can be monitored and evaluated. Through the generation of evidence, evaluation enables more informed management and decision-making for strategic planning and programming. Human development and human rights. Evaluation is guided by the people-centred approach of UNDP to development, which enhances capabilities, choices and rights for all men and women. Evaluation abides by universally shared values of equity, justice, gender equality and respect for diversity. United Nations system coordination and global partnership. Evaluation draws on and contributes to collaboration within the UN system to improve effectiveness and reduce transaction costs for development cooperation. UNDP advocates strengthened professional collaboration under the aegis of UNEG and country-level coordination in evaluation under the Resident Coordinator system. With the increasing engagement of UNDP in global initiatives and partnership programmes with other donors, non-governmental organizations and civil society, the conduct of joint evaluations enhances global partnership. National ownership. Evaluation should be guided by national priorities and concerns. It should be inclusive and take into account diverse national interests and values. Evaluation should strengthen partnerships with governments and key stakeholders. It should build the capacity of national institutions to implement, monitor and evaluate. 4.0 Evaluations in UNDP The evaluations conducted by UNDP fall into two categories: independent evaluations conducted by the Evaluation Office, and decentralized evaluations managed by country offices, regional bureaux and practice and policy bureaux, and conducted by external experts. Together they represent a coherent system of evaluation that provides the necessary coverage to manage for results and to support organizational accountability. Independent Evaluations The Evaluation Office is mandated to conduct evaluations for corporate accountability, strategic planning, and the development of information for global knowledge use. Strategic evaluations assess UNDP performance in areas that are critical to ensuring sustained contribution to development results in the context of emerging development issues and changing priorities at the global and regional levels. To this end, strategic evaluations may cover, for example, UNDP policies, practice areas, partnerships, programmatic approaches, cooperation modalities, or business models. The Evaluation Office will also engage in evaluations conducted jointly with other United Nations organizations to assess system-wide performance. Global, regional and South-South programme (corporate programme) evaluations assess the performance and intended and achieved results of those programmes. They are intended to reinforce the substantive accountability of UNDP to the Executive Board, and will be timed to contribute to the preparation and approval of the next programme. Assessments of Development Results (ADRs) assess the attainment of intended and achieved results as well as UNDP contributions to development results at the country level. Their scope will include, but not necessarily be confined to, UNDP responsiveness and alignment to country challenges and priorities; strategic positioning; use of comparative advantage; and engagement with partners. The number and selection of countries, and the timing of these evaluations, will be determined to ensure coverage and to allow findings and recommendations to feed into the preparation of the subsequent programme. Decentralized evaluations Country offices, regional bureaux, and practice and policy bureaux commission decentralized evaluations in the programmatic frameworks for which they are responsible. The key decentralized evaluations are the following: Outcome evaluation in UNDP assesses progress towards the attainment of outcome(s) which are changes in development conditions in programme countries. It focuses on UNDP's contribution towards the nationally owned outcome(s). It explicitly recognizes the role of partners in the attainment of the outcome(s). Outcome evaluations provide critical information to enhance development effectiveness and assist decision and policy making beyond a particular project or intervention. Outcome evaluations provide a substantive basis for UNDAF evaluations, and independent evaluations such as ADR and the evaluations of the Regional and Global Cooperation Frameworks. Project evaluation assesses the performance of a project in achieving its intended results. It yields useful information on project implementation arrangements and the achievement of outputs. It is at this level that direct cause and attribution can be addressed given the close causal linkage between the intervention and its effect or output. Project evaluation provides a basis for the evaluation of outcomes and programmes. 5.0 Mandatory Evaluations and Compliance Mandatory evaluations for the Evaluation Office include evaluations outlined in the evaluation agenda, which is approved by the Executive Board. The conduct of Outcome Evaluation is mandatory for programme units (Country Offices, regional bureaux, and practice and policy bureaux). Based on the guidance provided EO (see section on ‘developing an evaluation plan’), the programme units are required to select and commission outcome evaluations that provide the necessary information for decision-making, performance improvement and learning. At least one outcome evaluation should be conducted in each programme area of the country, regional and global programme documents. Priorities should be given to joint (outcome) evaluations, led by the government with other partners, of sectors and areas of UNDP’s interventions (e.g. PRSPs, sectors, etc). Project evaluations are mandatory only when they are required by a partnership protocol[1]. Programme units are strongly encouraged to commission evaluations of pilot projects before replication or upscaling, projects that are going into a next phase and projects over 5 years for accountability and learning purposes. [1] The standard clause to be included in all co-financing agreements, irrespective of whether the donor requests such a clause or not is the following: “All UNDP programmes and projects are evaluated in accordance with UNDP Evaluation Policy. UNDP and Government in consultation with other stakeholders will jointly agree on the purpose, use, timing, financing mechanisms and terms of reference for evaluating a project including an evaluation of its contribution to an outcome, which is listed in the Evaluation Plan. UNDP shall commission the evaluation, and the evaluation exercise shall be carried out by external independent evaluators.” 6.0 Use of Evaluation In accordance with the UNDP disclosure policy, all evaluations are made available in UNDP’s publicly accessible ERC. All evaluations require a management response.
6.1 Procedures (for preparing a management response to independent evaluations conducted by EO)
[1]
Except in the case of ADRs, where responsibility has been delegated to the Associate Administrator. 7.0 Roles and responsibilities Roles and responsibilities The Executive Board is the custodian of the evaluation policy. The Executive Board ensures the independence of the evaluation function, approves the annual work programme for the centralised evaluation function; requires management response and follow-up to evaluation by UNDP; and uses evaluation and reports on compliance with evaluation policy for accountability; and draws on the findings and recommendations of evaluation for oversight and approval of corporate policy, strategy and programmes. The Evaluation Office (EO) is the custodian of the evaluation function and reports directly to the Executive Board through the Administrator. It reports annually to the Executive Board on the function, findings and recommendations of evaluations, on compliance, quality assurance, and follow-up to evaluations conducted by UNDP and its associated funds and programmes; and alerts senior management to emerging evaluation-related issues of corporate significance. It develops an agenda for independent evaluations in line with the Strategic Plan, conducts independent evaluations in accordance with the agenda and ensures that the evaluations provide strategic and representative coverage of UNDP programmes and results, and that mandatory evaluations are carried out. EO sets evaluation standards for planning, conducting and using evaluations, developing and disseminating methodology and establishing the institutional mechanisms for applying the standards. EO is also responsible for establishing evaluation quality standards, developing and disseminating methodology, and providing advice. It also maintains the information management system (ERC) for the planning and tracking of evaluation and management response, and disseminating good practices. It also contributes to the UN reform agenda through its work as the chair of the United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG) and joint evaluations. It supports the harmonization of the evaluation function of UNDP and its associated funds and programmes use the experience of UNDP and its partners, including through working with UNEG, to advance the science, practice, quality and usefulness of evaluation. The Administrator of UNDP is accountable for UNDP results, and: ensures compliance with the evaluation policy as integral to effective accountability across the organization; safeguards the integrity of the evaluation function and its independence from operational management; appoints the Director of the EO, in consultation with the Executive Board, and ensures that there is no conflict of interest in employment, including limiting the term of appointment to four years, renewable once, and barring re-entry into UNDP: safeguards the independence of the EO by ensuring that the Director has the final say on the contents of all evaluation reports issued by EO; provides sufficient resources and capacity for evaluation in the organization; ensures that UNDP prepares a management response to evaluations that are submitted to the Executive Board; and ensures that senior management responds to and utilizes evaluation in their operational, strategic, policy and oversight functions and that appropriate follow-up to the findings and recommendations of evaluation is taken by the relevant units. The senior management of country offices, regional bureaux, practice and policy bureaux, and the associated funds and programmes will:
Directors of regional bureaux, in their exercise of line oversight, ensure compliance by country offices with mandatory requirements of the evaluation policy, and support and guide country office capacity in evaluation. They endorse the quality of the draft evaluation plans, as outlined in the quality criteria, before submitting them, as an annex to the CPD to the Executive Board. They are also responsible for ensuring the quality of evaluation products, including the evaluation TOR and reports, produced by their respective country offices. Evaluation units of the associated funds and programmes are the custodians of the evaluation function in their organizations, and they, respectively, for their fund or programme: support the elaboration of well-defined results frameworks to facilitate the evaluation of programmes and activities; submit to their senior management a biennial plan and budget for the evaluation unit; develop an annual agenda of evaluations to be conducted; manage and conduct evaluations; ensure, whenever possible, joint evaluation work with the United Nations system and other partners; quality-assure mandatory evaluations outsourced or managed by programme staff; ensure the dissemination of evaluation findings and lessons in appropriate formats for targeted audiences, and promote their consideration in decision-making and for learning, track management response and follow-up to agreed evaluation recommendations; alert their senior management to evaluation-related issues of corporate significance; contribute to developing evaluation capacity and ensure consistency with United Nations policy and reforms, and contribute to improving evaluation collaboration, quality and usefulness, including through participation in UNEG. 8.0 Resources in Evaluation
9.0 Contact
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
