Final Assessment Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
FINAL ASSESSMENT REPORT ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPMENT ACCOUNT PROJECT 14/15 AK April 2018 Strengthening national capacities to design and implement rights-based policies and programmes that address care of dependent populations and women’s economic autonomy in urban development and planning FINAL ASSESSMENT REPORT ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPMENT ACCOUNT PROJECT 14/15 AK Strengthening national capacities to design and implement rights-based policies and programmes that address care of dependent populations and women’s economic autonomy in urban development and planning April 2018 This report was prepared by Eva Otero, an external consultant, who led the evaluation and worked under the overall guidance of Raul García-Buchaca, Deputy Executive Secretary for Management and Programme Analysis of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), and Sandra Manuelito, Chief of the Programme Planning and Evaluation Unit. The work was directly supervised by Irene Barquero, Programme Management Officer of the same unit, who provided strategic and technical guidance, coordination, and methodological and logistical support. The evaluation team is grateful for the support provided by its project partners at ECLAC, all of whom were represented in the Evaluation Reference Group. Warm thanks go to the programme managers and technical advisors of ECLAC for their cooperation throughout the evaluation process and their assistance in the review of the report. All comments on the evaluation report by the Evaluation Reference Group and the evaluation team of the Programme Planning and Evaluation Unit were considered by the evaluator and duly addressed, where appropriate, in the final text of the report. The views expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Commission. Copyright © United Nations, 2018. All rights reserved Printed at United Nations, Santiago S.18-00602 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACRONYMS ...................................................................................................................................................... iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................... v 1. ABOUT THIS EVALUATION .......................................................................................................................... 8 1.1 AIMS AND GENERAL FRAMEWORK ......................................................................................................................... 8 1.2 LEVEL OF ANALYSIS AND KEY ISSUES ..................................................................................................................... 9 1.3 DATA COLLECTION METHODS AND ANALYTICAL TOOLS .................................................................................. 9 1.4 ANALYSING INFORMATION ...................................................................................................................................... 10 1.5 QUALITY ASSURANCE MECHANISMS ...................................................................................................................... 10 2. ABOUT THE PROJECT ................................................................................................................................... 11 2.1 ANALYSIS OF THE REGIONAL CONTEXT ................................................................................................................ 11 2.2 RELEVANCE .................................................................................................................................................................... 14 2.3 EFFICIENCY .................................................................................................................................................................... 19 2.4 EFFECTIVENESS ............................................................................................................................................................. 20 2.5 SUSTAINABILITY ............................................................................................................................................................ 38 3. CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................................. 42 4. LESSONS LEARNED ...................................................................................................................................... 46 5. RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................................................. 48 ANNEXES .......................................................................................................................................................... 51 ANNEX 1 TERMS OF REFERENCE ...................................................................................................................................... 52 ANNEX 2 DOCUMENTS REVIEWED ................................................................................................................................. 63 ANNEX 3 EVALUATION MATRIX ....................................................................................................................................... 64 ANNEX 4 INTERVIEW GUIDELINES .................................................................................................................................. 65 ANNEX 5 SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ............................................................................................................................... 69 ANNEX 6 LIST OF INTERVIEWEES .................................................................................................................................... 77 ANNEX 7 EVALUATOR’S REVISION MATRIX .................................................................................................................. 82 iii ACRONYMS ACRONYM DEFINITION AECID Spanish Agency for International Development Cooperation CDMX Government of Mexico City CECILA Interdisciplinary Commission of Care (in Mexico City) DGA Division for Gender Affairs ECLAC Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean ILO International Labour Organization ILPES Latin American and Caribbean Institute for Economic and Social Planning IAFFE International Association for the Feminist Economy IAM Ibero-American Union of Municipialists LAC Latin America and the Caribbean M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MAM Mechanism for the Advancement of Women MSUR South American Colloquiums on Metropolitan Cities ODI Overseas Development Institute PPEU Programme Planning and Evaluation Unit PPOD Programme Planning and Operations Division SDGs Sustainable Development Goals SERVIU Housing and Urbanization Service (Santiago) ToC Theory of Change ToR Terms of Reference UMOJA United Nation’s financial and management system UN United Nations UNDP United Nations Development Programme UN-Habitat United Nations Human Settlements Programme UN-Women United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women V4M Value for Money iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CONTEXT, AIMS AND METHODOLOGY OF THE EVALUATION 1. The object of analysis in this evaluation is the Development Account Project ROA 293-9 “Strengthening national capacities to design and implement rights-based policies and programmes that address the care of dependent populations and women’s economic autonomy in urban development and planning”. 2. The purpose of this regional project is to support national and local policymakers to improve their awareness, knowledge, skills and technical capacity to design policies and programmes that address women’s economic autonomy and the care of dependent populations as part of urban planning and development. The original duration of this project was approximately four years (2014–2017), having started activities in June 2014. 3. The pathway for change underpinning the ToC of the project is rooted in the idea that policy changes are more apt to occur when advocates (ECLAC in this case) develop relationships and work with those in positions of power and influence (i.e. working with key decision makers to design appropriate policies and programmes that address women’s economic autonomy and the care of dependent populations). 4. The main aim of the evaluation is to review the efficiency, effectiveness, relevance and sustainability of the project implementation and to document the results the project attained in relation to its overall objectives. 5. In answering the evaluation questions, the evaluator drew from the best available evidence across a range of sources, following a mixed-methods approach. FINDINGS RELEVANCE 6. The project tackles an innovative theme that is highly relevant to the targeted cities. It is a three-pronged theme that includes gender (including women’s economic autonomy), care and urban planning and is in line with the ECLAC strategic framework, municipal aims and the priorities in the targeted cities. 7. However, two types of situations have affected how the authorities have perceived the relevance of the project in different cities: (a) the degree of institutionalization of issues such as care and/or urban planning with a gender perspective; and (b) the level of ownership of the project by different local authorities. 8. Fruitful synergies have been established within and outside ECLAC. Many of these partnerships have been new and were forged through regional feminist networks between members of