Transcript DAC – UNDP Nordic Office

DAC – UNDP Nordic
Office
Wish for Reform → Need for Reform
1. Environment –
Trends in Development
More and better ODA
National Ownership :



MDG / PRSP / National Strategies
Budget Support – SWAPs
Coordination: Rome / Paris Declarations
Zambia Pilot
Joint Programming
Joint Missions
2. UN Response / Consequences
From UN Reform to new role in development :



Capacity Building
Partnerships :
UNDAF Matrix
UN
Government
Civil Society
Donors
3. New Catchwords –
Measuring Results




MOPAN
DFID
Danish Model
Partnership Survey
(refer to handouts)
UNDP Results Reporting and Donor Needs
(DENMARK, NETHERLANDS, NORWAY, SWEDEN, UK)
What is it that donors want to know, and where will they get that information from?
What key areas ?
What type of information?
From where?
Consistency with own
development cooperation
goals
All agencies commit to the MDGs and therefore look for
documentation on contributions to the attainment of these goals
MDG Reports
Relevance, comparative
advantage and mandate
All five agencies require documentation to show UNDP's goals and
their own development cooperation goals. All agencies also assess
the degree to which UNDP succeeds in attaining the goals set out in
its mandate and works within its areas of comparative advantage.
Reviews of various UNDP reports
and through MOPAN and embassy
reporting
Organisational efficiency
One agency defines efficiency as "the quality of the agency's
programming, management and financial administration". All look at
the degree to which the agency is focussed, has appropriate RBM
systems and is engaged in harmonization of procedures, planning
and reporting, including at country level.
This is assessed through reviews of
board documents, MOPAN and
feedback from embassies
Development effectiveness
The measures for "effectiveness" are rarely clear, but many stress
effectiveness at country level and focus on the various initiatives
under UNDAF and UNDG. Some agencies propose to measure
effectiveness i) as an instrument for poverty reduction and ii) in
delivering results
DESA report, UNDAF matrixes and
reviews, ROAR, DER, MOPAN,
feedback from embassies
UN Reform
All five want to measure UNDP's contribution to UN reform, in
particular in terms of improving coordination, harmonisation, and
prioritization.
UNDP reporting, MOPAN, feedback
from embassies
Country level performance
Several agencies stress the need to demonstrate added value at
country level. Effectiveness at country level is seen both in terms of
program delivery and in terms of the harmonisation agenda,
including: i) UNDAF ii) coordination and partnerships iii) alignment
to PRS iv) support to PRS M&E system v) participation in SWAPS
DESA, UNDAF reporting, MOPAN,
feedback from embassies
The MEFF checklist (DFID)
Organizational
sytems
Internal
Performance
Focus on country
level results
Focus on
partnership
Corporate
Governance
3 questions
3 questions
3 questions
Corporate Strategy
3 questions
3 questions
3 questions
Resource
Management
4 questions
3 questions
2 questions
Operational
Management
4 questions
2 questions
3 questions
Quality Assurance
4 questions
3 questions
2 questions
Staff Management
4 questions
2 questions
3 questions
M&E Lesson
learning
3 questions
3 questions
3 questions
Reporting
3 questions
3 questions
3 questions
Annual assessment of performance
of key organisations at country level
(Denmark)
• Overall assessment of the organisation’s country-level performance
• Assessment of the organisation’s alignment of strategies to PRSs
and MDGs, and its contribution towards monitoring the PRS process
and results reporting
• Assessment of the organisation’s participation in harmonisation,
donor coordination, SWAP and basket funding
• Assessment of the organisation’s cooperation and coordination
concerning Danish SPS, cross-cutting priorities and/or thematic
focus areas.
‘RBM positive’ (green) scores as % total valid* scores
Internal
performance
Country level
results
Partnership
Agency
Overall
average %
MDBs
70
60
70
67
World Bank
71
73
82
75
AfDB
75
73
64
71
EBRD
82
53
62
68
AsDB
64
55
73
64
IADB
57
45
67
56
UN Dev’ment
Agencies
72
65
69
69
UNDP
93
95
95
94
UNFPA
86
91
77
85
UNICEF
82
64
48
66
UNIFEM
63
59
65
62
HABITAT
57
41
82
60
IFAD
50
41
45
46
UN Standard
Setting Ags.
40
26
49
38
UNIDO
75
55
90
73
WHO
39
40
45
41
OHCHR
31
15
43
30
FAO
36
10
35
28
UNESCO
18
9
32
19
Agency
Internal
performance
Country level
results
Partnership
Overall
average %
Humanitarian
Agencies
67
69
84
73
ICRC
86
78
83
83
UNHCR
64
75
95
77
WFP
50
53
73
58
Coordination
Agencies
71
48
86
70
IFRC
70
59
94
74
OCHA
73
43
83
69
UNAIDS
71
42
80
66
European
Commission
57
68
86
69
All agencies
63
54
70
62
Other
*Omits “no information” and “not relevant” scores

Future > Evaluation capacity

Conclusions / Suggestions