INDEPENDENT I Evaluation Office United Nations Development Programme INDEPENDENT COUNTRY PROGRAMME EVALUATION NORTH MACEDONIA HUMAN DEVELOPMENT effectivenessCOORDINATION efficiencyPARTNERSHIP sustainability NATIONAL OWNERSHIP relevance sustainability MANAGING FOR RESULTS responsivenes COORDINATION AND DEVELOPMENT responsiveness COORDINATINATION HUMAN effectivenessCOORDINATION AND PARTNERSHIP sustainability COORDINATION relevance sustainability MANAGING FOR RESULTS responsivenes HUMAN DEVELOPMENT effectiveness effectivenessCOORDINATION efficiency PARTNERSHIP sustainability NATIONAL OWNERSHIP relevance MANAGING FOR RESULTS effectivenessCOORDINATION efficiencyCOORDINATION AND PARTNERSHIP sustainability COORDINATION AND PARTNERSHIP sustainability MANAGING FOR RESULTS responsivenes HUMAN DEVELOPMENT effectiveness relevance sustainability MANAGING FOR RESULTS responsivenes COORDINATION AND DEVELOPMENT responsiveness COORDINATINATION HUMAN effectivenessCOORDINATION efficiency COORDINATION AND PARTNERSHIP sustainability COORDINATION relevance sustainability MANAGING FOR RESULTS responsivenes HUMAN DEVELOPMENT effectiveness effectivenessCOORDINATION efficiency PARTNERSHIP sustainability NATIONAL OWNERSHIP relevance MANAGING COORDINATION AND DEVELOPMENT responsiveness NATIONAL OWNERSHIP sustainability PARTNERSHIP INDEPENDENT COUNTRY PROGRAMME EVALUATION NORTH MACEDONIA HUMAN DEVELOPMENT effectivenessCOORDINATION efficiency PARTNERSHIP sustainability NATIONAL OWNERSHIP relevance sustainability MANAGING FOR RESULTS responsivenes COORDINATION AND DEVELOPMENT responsiveness COORDINATINATION HUMAN effectivenessCOORDINATION AND PARTNERSHIP sustainability COORDINATION relevance sustainability MANAGING FOR RESULTS responsivenes HUMAN DEVELOPMENT effectiveness effectivenessCOORDINATION efficiencyPARTNERSHIP sustainability NATIONAL OWNERSHIP relevance MANAGING FOR RESULTS effectivenessCOORDINATION efficiency COORDINATION AND PARTNERSHIP sustainability COORDINATION AND PARTNERSHIP sustainability MANAGING FOR RESULTS responsivenes HUMAN DEVELOPMENT effectiveness relevance sustainabilityMANAGING FOR RESULTS responsivenes COORDINATION AND DEVELOPMENT responsiveness COORDINATINATION HUMAN effectivenessCOORDINATION efficiencyCOORDINATION AND PARTNERSHIP sustainability COORDINATION relevance sustainability MANAGING FOR RESULTS responsivenes HUMAN DEVELOPMENT effectiveness effectivenessCOORDINATION efficiencyPARTNERSHIP sustainability NATIONAL OWNERSHIP relevance MANAGING REPORTS PUBLISHED UNDER THE ICPE SERIES Afghanistan Côte d’Ivoire Lao People’s Philippines (Islamic Republic of) Croatia Democratic Republic Rwanda Albania Cuba Liberia Sao Tome and Principe Algeria Djibouti Libya Senegal Angola Dominican Republic Malawi Serbia Argentina Ecuador Malaysia Seychelles Armenia Equatorial Guinea Maldives Sierra Leone Azerbaijan Egypt Mali Somalia Bahrain El Salvador Mauritania Sri Lanka Bangladesh Eswatini Mexico Sudan Barbados and OECS Ethiopia Moldova (Republic of) Syria Belarus Gabon Mongolia Tajikistan Benin Georgia Montenegro Tanzania Bhutan Ghana Morocco Thailand Bosnia and Herzegovina Guatemala Mozambique Timor-Leste Botswana Guinea-Bissau Namibia Togo Brazil Guyana Nepal Tunisia Bulgaria Honduras Nicaragua Turkey Burkina Faso India Niger Uganda Cambodia Indonesia Nigeria Ukraine Cameroon Iraq North Macedonia United Arab Emirates Chile Jamaica Pacific Islands Uruguay China Jordan Pakistan Uzbekistan Colombia Kenya Panama Viet Nam Congo (Democratic Kosovo Papua New Guinea Yemen Republic of) Kuwait Paraguay Zambia Congo (Republic of) Kyrgyzstan Peru Zimbabwe Costa Rica INDEPENDENT COUNTRY PROGRAMME EVALUATION: NORTH MACEDONIA Copyright © UNDP October 2020 Manufactured in the United States of America. 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 UNDP Independent Evaluation Office. Acknowledgements The Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) of UNDP would like to thank all those who have contributed to this evaluation. IEO TEAM Oscar A. Garcia (Director), Evaluation consultants: Indran Naidoo (former Director) and Paul Georis, Daniele Pedretti and Silvana Rusi, Arild Hauge (Deputy Director) through the consulting firm T33Srl Lead Evaluator: Research support: Alan Fox Tianhan Gui and Elizabeth Wojnar RBEC Cluster Evaluation Coordinator: Publishing and outreach: Yogesh Bhatt Nicki Mokhtari The IEO could not have completed the evaluation without the support from: UNDP North Macedonia: Other stakeholders and partners: Narine Sahakyan (Resident Representative), Government of North Macedonia, Sanja Bojanic (Deputy Resident representatives of the United Nations agencies, Representative) and Jasmina Belcovska nongovernmental organizations and bilateral (M&E and Innovation Adviser). and multilateral development partners, civil society and communities consulted. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i Foreword I am pleased to present the Independent Country The evaluation notes that UNDP is recognized as Programme Evaluation of the UNDP country a neutral and reliable partner by both donors and programme in North Macedonia. This is the first the Government, and a partner of choice when country-level assessment of UNDP interventions in rapid development advice and programming is North Macedonia by the Independent Evaluation needed, that builds effective partnerships with Office (IEO) of the United Nations Development local stakeholders. The evaluation highlights a Programme (UNDP). The evaluation covers the tendency for the Government to use UNDP as an programme period from 2016 to mid-2019. It implementing body to compensate for capacity has been carried out in collaboration with the gaps, which can weaken incentives for govern- Government of North Macedonia, UNDP North ment ministries to strengthen their own capacities. Macedonia country office, and the UNDP Regional Recommendations are provided, which include Bureau for Europe and the Commonwealth of suggestions for UNDP to scale up subnational inter- Independent States (RBEC). ventions, encourage inter-municipal cooperation and reinforce the role of regional planning in the UNDP has supported the Government of context of European Union integration. North Macedonia for over two decades to pursue economic and social reforms and build capacity for I would like to thank the Government of sustainable management of natural resources. Over North Macedonia, various national stakeholders the years, its programme has been shaped by the and colleagues at the UNDP North Macedonia country’s development priorities, challenges and country office and UNDP RBEC, who graciously the Government’s Programme of Work. provided their time, information and support to this evaluation. I trust that the findings, conclu- Its current programme (2016-2020), which is under sions and recommendations provided herein will review, focuses on support to the Government for help to strengthen the formulation of UNDP’s next promoting good governance to ensure delivery of country programme strategy in North Macedonia better services to all citizens; addressing issues of for a more impactful contribution to the achieve- social inclusion by empowering the most vulner- ment of sustainable development results in the able people in society and expanding employment country. opportunities; and building resilience societies and ensuring sustainable development. The evaluation found that UNDP has played an important role in helping to address high-priority Oscar A. Garcia, national development issues, even as it notes Director, continuing challenges. The evaluation highlights a Independent Evaluation Office need to improve intersectoral coherence, to better address the needs of target groups from multiple perspectives. FOREWORD iii Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations vii Evaluation Brief 1 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 3 1.1 Purpose, objectives and scope of the evaluation 4 1.2 Country context 5 1.3 UNDP programme under review 9 CHAPTER 2. FINDINGS 15 2.1 Employment and livelihoods 17 2.2 Democratic governance 17 2.3 Social inclusion 20 2.4 Environmental sustainability and resilience 22 2.5 Results management 24 2.6 Portfolio management 25 2.7 Joint programming 25 2.8 Gender 26 CHAPTER 3. CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND MANAGEMENT RESPONSE 27 3.1 Conclusions 28 3.2 Recommendations and management response 31 ANNEXES 42 TABLE AND FIGURES Table 1. UNDP country programme outcomes: indicative budget and expenditures 9 Figure 1. CPD North Macedonia 2016-2020: share of indicative budget per outcome area 10 Figure 2. Evolution of expenditure by outcome area 10 Figure 3. Expenditures recorded as share of indicative budget 10 v Acronyms and Abbreviations ALMM Active Labour Market Measures CO Country office CPD Country programme document CSO Civil society organization CWP Community Works Programme EU European Union DRR Disaster risk reduction GDP Gross domestic product GEN Gender marker GHG Greenhouse gas ICPE Independent Country Programme Evaluation IEO Independent Evaluation Office LSGU Local self-government unit M&E Monitoring and evaluation MLSP Ministry of Labour and Social Policy MoLSG Ministry of Local Self-Government ODA Official development assistance PSD Partnership for Sustainable Development PwD Person with disabilities RBEC UNDP Regional Bureau for Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States ReLOaD Regional Programme on Local Democracy in Western Balkans ROAR Results Oriented Annual Report SDC