• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

EVALUA TION OF THE ROLE OF UNDP IN SUPPORTING NATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT OF THE EVALUATION OF THE ROLE OF UNDP IN SUPPORTING NATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT OF THE MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Independent Evaluation Office United Nations Development Programme EVALUATION OF THE ROLE OF UNDP IN SUPPORTING NATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT OF THE MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Independent Evaluation Office, May 2015 United Nations Development Programme EVALUATION OF THE ROLE OF UNDP IN SUPPORTING NATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT OF THE MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS Copyright © UNDP 2015, all rights reserved. Manufactured in the United States of America. Printed on recycled paper. The analysis and recommendations of this report do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations Development Programme, its Executive Board or the United Nations Member States. This is an independent publication by the Independent Evaluation Office of UNDP. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) of Fonnegra, Marie Donna Ranaivoarivelo and the United Nations Development Programme Lakshmi Boojoo). Jayati Ghosh and Miguel (UNDP) would like to thank all those who con- Szekely, from the IEO External Advisory Panel, tributed to this evaluation. The evaluation team provided excellent methodological and substan- was led by Olivier Cossée from the Independent tive advice and quality assessed the draft report. Evaluation Office, who also conducted the Ethiopia and Belize case studies. The interna- The evaluation was carried out with the invalu- tional team was composed of Naresh Singh, who able assistance of UNDP staff at headquarters conducted the Albania and Ghana country case and in the eleven case study countries. Their studies, reviewed strategic positioning and con- insight, knowledge, advice and comments made tributed to the present report; Franciscus Noij, this evaluation possible. We cannot acknowledge who conducted the case studies in Bangladesh, here all those who contributed to this evaluation, Indonesia and Mongolia; André Damiba, who but would like to express our particular gratitude undertook the case studies in Madagascar, Mali to Shantanu Mukherjee, Renata Rubian, Marielza and Sudan; and Irene Rodriguez, who performed Oliveira, Ayodele Odusola, Pedro Conceicao and the Colombia case study. Elham Seyedsayamdost Corinne Woods. Last but not least, the Country undertook a desk study of national develop- Offices in all case study countries provided invalu- ment strategies and contributed to chapter 2 of able logistical and administrative assistance, and this report. Michael Craft supported the whole IEO would like to express its deepest appreciation evaluation process as research assistant, took part of this assistance. The Ethiopia Country Office, in three country case studies and contributed to and especially Bettina Wool, James Wakiaga and the writing of this report. Country case studies Roza Mamuye, deserve a particular mention in were further assisted by national consultants as this regard, as they agreed to provide a testing follows: Albania: Engjell Skreli; Bangladesh: Dr. ground for the case study methodology and wel- Binayak Sen; Belize: Carolyn Trench-Sandiford; comed the entire team of international evaluators. Colombia: Juan Ignacio Arango Fonnegra; Ghana: Daniel Andoh; Indonesia: Hizrah Muchtar; The quality enhancement and administrative sup- Madagascar: Marie Donna Ranaivoarivelo; Mali: port provided by our colleagues at the IEO was Ousmane Diallo; Mongolia: Lakshmi Boojoo; critical in the success of the evaluation. Michael and Sudan: Ahmed Gamal Eldin. Some of the Reynolds and Alan Fox peer reviewed the draft national consultants also helped review UNDP report. Michelle Sy and Antana Locs provided guidance documents related to the MDGs administrative support. Sasha Jahic managed the (Carolyn Trench-Sandiford, Juan Ignacio Arango production and publication of the report. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii FOREWORD The year 2015—recently proclaimed the “year The evaluation highlights a number of issues. of evaluation” by the General Assembly—is also One is that UNDP sometimes supported MDG- the finish line for the Millennium Development based planning processes that were lacking real- Goals (MDGs). Since their birth in year 2000, istic means of implementation, e.g. without an when they were proposed as part of the dec- identified funding source. Such overly-optimistic laration emanating from the Millennium planning undermined the credibility of the MDG Summit, the MDGs have grown to represent a agenda in some countries, and raised expectations global frame of reference for development sup- that UNDP was unable to fulfil. UNDP’s insuf- port, meant to focus attention and resources ficient internal monitoring of its own support onto clear priorities. The effort to establish programmes also merits improvement. Moreover, Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) builds the technical knowledge, expertise and mandates on the momentum of the MDGs. As the United of other UN agencies and funds could have been Nations embarks on this next global goal-setting leveraged by UNDP to a greater extent during effort, it is important that we consider and learn the MDG era. More coordination among UN from past experience. It is in this spirit that we agencies will be required to effectively support provide this evaluation of UNDP support to the highly technical post-2015 agenda. MDG achievement at country level. Indeed, the SDGs are shaping up as markedly In 2001, the Secretary-General of the United more complex that the MDGs. They will require Nations entrusted UNDP with a lead role to a quantum leap in the capacity of developing facilitate country-level monitoring of the MDGs nations and their development partners to col- and to campaign for the Goals on behalf of the laborate in joint programmes and measure prog- ress. UNDP appears well placed to champion, United Nations. Since then, the MDGs have monitor and support the SDG agenda as a whole. shaped the UNDP programming framework to However, the organization will need to clearly a considerable extent, with consistent investment articulate its value-added proposition. As com- to monitor progress against MDG targets at the pared to 15 years ago, many more agencies are national and regional levels, to raise awareness now lobbying for larger roles and greater visibil- and stakeholder buy-in through campaigns and ity in support of the global development agenda. MDG reports, to support the incorporation of the Goals in national development strategies and I hope that the conclusions and recommendations to help countries meet particular Goals. from this evaluation will help enhance UNDP’s contribution to the achievement of the next global The evaluation found that UNDP has generally development agenda and provide broader lessons delivered quality products and services to help that may be of relevance to all stakeholders. The translate the Goals into clear development results world still needs a global partnership for develop- at the country level. As can be expected, imple- ment, and as the findings from the present evalu- mentation at country level varied in scope and ation show, UNDP can help. quality. Key performance factors include: national ownership of the MDG agenda; national capacity for planning and statistics; presence or absence of disasters and crises; strength of UNDP’s leader- Indran A. Naidoo ship in country; and last but not least, availability Director of domestic and/or foreign resources. Independent Evaluation Office of UNDP FOREWORD v TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms and Abbreviations ix Executive Summary xi Chapter 1. Introduction 1 1.1 Rationale and Purpose of the Evaluation 1 1.2 Scope of the Evaluation 2 1.3 Evaluation Criteria and Questions 3 1.4 Data Collection and Analysis 5 1.5 Evaluation Management and Process 8 1.6 Structure of the Report 9 Chapter 2. The Millennium Development Goals 11 2.1 UN Goal-setting before the MDGs 11 2.2 The International Development Goals 12 2.3 The Rise of the Poverty Agenda at the World Bank and the United Nations 15 2.4 The Millennium Summit 17 2.5 Drafting the Millennium Development Goals 18 2.6 The MDGs Gain Traction 20 2.7 The Post-2015 Development Agenda 22 Chapter 3. UNDP Role and Strategy in MDG Support 25 3.1 Overview of UNDP Support 25 3.2 Evolution over Time 26 3.3 UNDP MDG Roles in Detail 29 3.4 Financing UNDP Support to MDG Achievement 39 3.5 Institutional Arrangements 41 Chapter 4. Assessment of UNDP Contribution 43 4.1 Relevance 43 4.2 Effectiveness 46 4.3 Impact and Sustainability 71 4.4 Efficiency and Management 77 4.5 Partnerships and Positioning 82 Chapter 5. Conclusions and Recommendations 87 5.1 Conclusions 87 5.2 Recommendations 89 Annexes Annex 1. Terms of Reference 93 Annex 2. People Consulted 115 Annex 3. Documents Consulted 127 Annex 4. List of MDG Targets and Indicators 141 Annex 5. Management Response 145 TABLE OF CONTENTS vii Figures Figure 1. Simplified Theory of Change of the UNDP Approach to MDG Support 4 Figure 2. Primary Data Collection Methods 6 Figure 3. Total ODA Disbursements by OECD/DAC Countries, 1960–2012 13 Figure 4. Timeline of Key MDG-Related Events 28 Figure 5. Number of National MDGRs Produced by Year, 2001–2013 32 Figure 6. Regional MDGRs 33 Figure 7. UNDP Approach to MDG-based National Planning 35 Figure 8. MDG Roles Played by Survey Respondents 38 Figure 9. UNDP Expenditures on MDG Support, Broken Down by Role 39 Figure 10. National Ownership of the MDG Agenda among Governments, by Country Income Level 44 Figure 11. MDG Icons 45 Figure 12. Most Countries Produced Two or Three MDG Reports 49 Figure 13. Production Trends for Country-level MDG Reports and National Human Development Reports 51 Figure 14. MDG Mainstreaming in National Strategies of 50 Developing Countries 58 Figure 15. Internal Factors Influencing UNDP Effectiveness 77 Figure 16. Share of the MDG Achievement Fund by Implementing UN Agency 80 Tables Table 1. Evaluation Data Collection Methods and Coverage of UNDP Programme Countries 6 Table 2. Country Case Studies 7 Table 3.

Load more

  178

Copy Link