Technical Note. TN Stakeholder Analysis Version April 2017

Transcription

1 Decentralized evaluation for evidence-based decision making WFP Office of Evaluation Decentralized Evaluation Quality Assurance System (DEQAS) 1. Introduction Technical Note Stakeholder analysis Version: April The purpose of this Technical Note is to explain the role of a stakeholder analysis in design and implementation of a decentralized evaluation or review, including how to analyze and map stakeholders and decide who, when, how and how much to involve them. It is intended for use by WFP staff commissioning and/or managing a decentralized evaluation or review, and/or evaluation or review teams conducting a decentralized evaluation or review for WFP. Examples of a stakeholder analysis and stakeholder mapping are provided in Annex When to use it? It should be read during the Preparation Phase, when identifying the key stakeholders who will be involved in the evaluation or review, and again during the Inception Phase (for all evaluations and those reviews which include this phase), when the formal Stakeholder Analysis is being conducted by the evaluation team as part of the Inception Report. 2. What is stakeholder analysis and why is it important? 3. WFP interventions operate within complex environments, where multiple actors have varying roles, interests, influences, and expectations about a specific intervention and the evaluation or review associated with it. It is important to analyze who these stakeholders are, their role and interests. Stakeholder analysis involves a. identifying who stakeholders are, b. understanding their stake (i.e. level of interest and influence) in the evaluation or review, and c. Determining their level of involvement in the evaluation and in the subject being evaluated (or review) 4. The objective of a stakeholder analysis is to ensure, as much as possible, that those who have an interest in the subject of the evaluation/review, and/or those can influence the evaluation/review are considered and in doing so that their concerns are taken into account. Experience has shown that such an approach improves the quality of evaluation/reviews process and product, and greatly strengthens stakeholder ownership of findings and recommendations. 3. Stakeholder Definition: are stakeholders? 5. The Organization for Economic and cooperation development (OECD) defines stakeholders as agencies, organizations, groups or individuals who have a direct or indirect interest in development intervention or its evaluation. 1 It is important to differentiate between stakeholders of the subject of the evaluation/review and stakeholders of an evaluation/review. A Partner 1 OECD (2002) Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results Based Management 1 P a g e

2 Government or UN agencies, for example, may not be involved in the funding or implementation of the intervention, but may have an interest in its evaluation. 6. For WFP evaluations and reviews, stakeholders may include some or all of the following internal and external stakeholder groups. Box 1: Stakeholder groups Internal Stakeholders External Stakeholders WFP Country / Sub / Area Office Regional Bureau WFP HQ divisions WFP Executive Board Office of Evaluation Affected populations/communities (see next section for further details) Government Institutions UN Agencies or Country Teams NGOs and community based organizations Donors Co-operating partners Private sector (if applicable) 7. For each group of stakeholders, specific agencies or individuals (disaggregated by sex and age) who are interested in and can influence the evaluation should be identified. For internal stakeholders, this may include key focal points of the subject of the evaluation. For external stakeholders, this may include key decision makers, community leaders, or ministries involved with, or affected by the WFP intervention. 4. Integrating perspectives of affected populations 8. In line with the Technical Note for Integrating Gender in WFP Evaluations, the United Nations System-wide action plan (UNSWAP) evaluation performance indicator (EPI), and the UN guidance on integrating human rights and gender equality perspectives into evaluations, 2 both evaluations/reviews should consider the perspectives of the populations affected by WFP interventions, based on appropriate gender analysis beyond sex and age disaggregation. Analysis of target groups should consider the differences within the target groups (e.g. age (children, youth, adult men and women), gender, sector, urban/rural, humanitarian situation). 9. In situations of conflict or fragility, or in situations requiring a humanitarian response, access issues may prevent the full involvement of affected population in the evaluation process, including consultation for their views. When planning for the evaluation or review, consideration should be given to potential challenges that might arise in accessing and consulting with beneficiaries, and how these challenges might be mitigated or managed. Any limitations should be documented e.g. the Inception report (for an evaluation). The key principle is that perspectives of affected populations (men, women, boys and girls) should be sought wherever feasible. 2 Integrating Human Right and Gender Equality into Evaluations Towards UNEG Guidance, (August 2014) 2 P a g e

3 5. When do stakeholders participate in the evaluation or review? 10. Stakeholders should be involved at specific/appropriate steps of in the evaluation/review process without compromising the independence, integrity or impartiality of the evaluation. Table 1 illustrates when to involve which stakeholders, but the actual involvement will differ from evaluation to another depending on context and stakeholders. Table 1: Stakeholder participation in each phase Phases Stakeholder involvement 1. Planning Through consultation when planning for the evaluation, a preliminary list of stakeholders internal to WFP and external can be identified. 2. Preparation When drafting the Terms of Reference, the WFP Evaluation Manager or Review focal point should identify who has a stake in the subject of the evaluation or review. Stakeholders can be consulted for their input on key technical issues, methods and timing while drafting the TOR (see Template for TOR and Quality Checklist for TOR). 3. Inception (this is optional for reviews but a requirement for evaluations) For evaluations, the inception phase should involve initial consultation with stakeholders as appropriate and specific identification of those who will be consulted during data collection. Where it is anticipated that it will not be possible to fully involve all key stakeholders, this should be indicated in the limitations in the inception report (see Template for Inception Report and Quality Checklist for Inception Report) 4. Collect Data Stakeholders should be consulted for their inputs/perspectives through surveys, interviews and focus groups in the data collection phase of the evaluation or review, which usually involves fieldwork. 5. Analyze Data and Report Draft report This phase provides for direct consultation of affected populations, and the evaluation should be designed in a way that ensures that men, women, youth, boys and girls, as well as other vulnerable groups are sufficiently consulted. Stakeholders should be provided with a draft evaluation or review report for their comments. For evaluation this should be through the evaluation reference group; The comments are submitted to the evaluation or review team 6. Disseminate and Follow- Up Final Report The final report should be disseminated to both internal and external stakeholders (a requirement as part of evaluation). Recommendations should be targeted to specific stakeholders or stakeholder groups. There should be further communication and sharing of the results of the evaluation in line with the communication and learning plan 3 P a g e

4 6. Further reading 11. For more information on stakeholder mapping, see below: 1. DFID (July 1995), Guidance note on how to do stakeholder analysis, Social Development Department. 2. Linda G. Morra Imas, Ray C. Rist (2009) The Road to Results: designing and conducting effective development evaluations, pg ODI (2009) Planning Tools: Stakeholder Analysis 4 P a g e

5 Annex 1. Example of completed stakeholder analysis Example taken from: Inception Package: Mozambique, Country Programme: An evaluation of WFP s ( ) 12. The stakeholder analysis was initiated in the TOR by the EM and completed in the inception phase by the Evaluation team 13. The stakeholder analysis below groups stakeholders according to a. Internal and external stakeholder groups. b. Primary (who have a direct interest in the evaluation ) and secondary (who have an indirect interest in the evaluation) 14. For each group of stakeholder the matrix clarifies: 1. Their interest in the evaluation either because they were responsible of the programme evaluated, affected by it, partners during its implementation, etc. 2. Their involvement in the evaluation as key informants, users, etc. 3. the stakeholders are and possibly how they were approached during the evaluation process Stakeholder Internal (WFP) stakeholders WFP Country Office in Maputo decision-making regarding the implementation of the CP. Liaise with stakeholders in country. design of next CP with WFP HQ Key informant, primary stakeholders and users of the evaluation -Involved in using evaluation findings in deciding on the next CP Senior management of WFP CO in Maputo WFP programme officers WFP logistics staff WFP ICT staff WFP administrative staff Consultants who have worked on the CP between 2012 and 2014 (Will include both current and former WFP staff) All to be interviewed 5 P a g e

6 WFP Field Offices in Gaza, Tete, and Beira day-today implementation of the CP. Liaise with stakeholders at decentralized levels. In direct contact with beneficiaries. Key informant, and primary stakeholder - Users of the evaluation, will be affected by outcomes Field office WFP staff (programme and logistics) (Will include both current and former staff) All to be interviewed, by phone or in person Regional Bureau (RB) for Southern Africa (OMJ) oversight of Mozambique WFP. Provides technical support to country offices. Key informant and primary stakeholder Involved in planning of next CP. Interested in independent account CP performance and applying learning from evaluation to other countries Programme staff responsible for the Mozambique CP Regional M&E adviser (Silvia Biondi), the Senior Regional Programme Adviser (Sarah Longford), the regional C&V adviser, regional nutrition adviser All to be interviewed by phone Office of Evaluation (OEV) Provides indirect, independent oversight through commissioning of evaluations (in consultation with the WFP decision making structures) Commissioner of the Evaluation - OEV has an interest in promoting learning from evaluations across WFP. Also interested in gathering lessons from this approach to conducting evaluations. Will include the evaluation findings in the annual synthesis of all OpEvs Evaluation manager. Other staff of the evaluation office (no interviews) No interviews to be conducted WFP Headquarters (HQ) Selected departments at HQ level provide technical support and inputs into design and implementation of CP components (e.g. on school feeding, social protection, etc.) Key informant and primary stakeholder - can provide further information and clarity on relevant aspects of strategy/guidance. Interviews to be conducted as necessary to enhance understanding of corporate policy and support provided to country level 6 P a g e

7 WFP Executive Board Provides final oversight of WFP operations worldwide, makes decisions and gives guidance to programmes. Primary stakeholder - The evaluation will feed into an annual synthesis of all OpEvs, which will be presented to the EB. Members of the EB. No interviews to be conducted External stakeholders Beneficiaries School Feeding beneficiaries Ultimate recipients of WFP support Key informants and primary stakeholder - Providing perspectives on the results, outcomes, and emerging impact of WFP s intervention. Will be affected by the decision to continue the interventions or not. Sample of schools to be selected, and within each school a sample of the below persons will be interviewed: Direct beneficiaries are pupils, teachers and cooks (equal numbers of women and men to be consulted). Indirect beneficiaries are parents, members of Parent Teacher Association (PTA), community members, and community leaders (equal numbers of women and men to be consulted). Individual and group interviews Social Protection beneficiaries Ultimate recipients of WFP support Key informants and primary stakeholder - Providing perspectives on the results, outcomes, and emerging impact of WFP s interventions. Will be affected by the decision to continue the interventions or not. Persons living with HIV and TB receiving food. Vulnerable people receiving cash and vouchers. Participants in food for assets programmes (From all groups-to be selected to reflect the ratio of female and male beneficiaries. and focus groups 7 P a g e

8 Nutrition beneficiaries (component 3 and cross-cutting across operation areas) Ultimate recipients of WFP support Key informants and primary stakeholder - Providing perspectives on the results, outcomes, and emerging impact of WFP s intervention. Will be affected by the decision to continue the interventions or not Persons living with HIV and TB receiving food. Vulnerable people receiving cash and vouchers. Participants in food for assets programme, as well as moderately malnourished patients who received super cereal. Health centre personal who are responsible for HIV/AIDS and focus groups Small Producers and Processors Ultimate recipients of WFP support Key informants and primary stakeholders - Providing perspectives on the results, outcomes, and emerging impact of WFP s intervention. Will be affected by the decision to continue the interventions or not Small producers and processors contracted by WFP or partner s NGOs and focus groups Disaster Risk Reduction beneficiaries Intermediate recipients of WFP support Key informant and secondary stakeholder - Providing perspectives on the results, outcomes, and emerging impact of WFP s support in Disaster Preparedness. Will be affected by the decision to continue the interventions or not Beneficiaries in villages in areas that have experienced environmental challenges hazards over the period of the Country Programme to gain insight into the effectiveness and efficiency of the support they have received from GoM institutions Beneficiaries in areas where DRR assets have been rehabilitated or constructed and focus groups 8 P a g e

9 Government at central level (Maputo) Ministry of Education (MoE) providing guidance on school feeding priorities and approaches, and ensuring alignment with Government policy Key informant and primary stakeholder - on government policy, priorities, views on support by WFP and on expanding school feeding, on GoM commitment to providing/ mobilizing resources. Will have perspectives on next CP phase. Lesson learning from the evaluation Director of DIPE Directorate) / Head of Agriculture and School Feeding Department (Special Programs (Department of special programs) Director of Planning. Director of Finance. Ministry of Health (MoH) / Ministério da Saúde (MISAU) oversight of nutrition interventions that are delivered through the health system at central and decentralized levels Key informant - on government policy, coordination, views on achievements, challenges, and inputs by WFP. Will have perspectives on next CP phase, and on links to GoM priorities. Lesson learning from the evaluation Head of nutrition unit in the MoH/MISAU Coordinator of Programa de Reabilitação Nutricional (PRN) Ministry of Industry and Trade (MIC) oversight of market information system implementation; supervise MIC cereal storage and milling facilities Key informant and primary stakeholder on government policy, coordination, views on achievements and challenges and on inputs by WFP. Will have perspectives on next CP phase, and on links to GoM priorities. Lesson learning from the evaluation National Director of trade Mr Cabriel Muianga Director of the Cereal institute of Mozambique (ICM) Head of INFOCOM (market information system) 9 P a g e

10 Ministry of Agriculture (MINAG) oversight of support to smallholder farmers Key informant and primary stakeholder on government policy, coordination, views on achievements, challenges, and inputs by WFP. Will have perspectives on next CP phase, and on links to GoM priorities. Lesson learning from the evaluation Head of National Directorate of Agrarian Services (DNSA). Head of International Cooperation Department (DCI). Head of National Directorate of Economy (DNE). Head of Agricultural Market Information System (SIMA). Head of National Directorate of Rural Extension. National Institute for Disaster Management (INGC) oversight of disaster response, raising public awareness on disaster prevention, coordinating early warning systems, and mobilizing relief activities during and after disasters key informant on government policy, views achievements, challenges, and inputs by WFP. Will have perspectives on next CP phase, and on links to GoM priorities. Lesson learning from the evaluation Staff at INGC Maputo National AIDS Council (CNCS) the coordination of the National HIV/AIDS response of all actors involved key informant will have views on government policy, as well as on achievements, challenges and technical and financial inputs by WFP. Will have perspectives on next CP phase, and on links to GoM priorities. Lesson learning from the evaluation Head of the National AIDS Council 10 P a g e

11 Ministry of Women and Social Affairs (MMAS) policy development and experimentation of different modalities of social action key informant - on government policy, views on achievements, challenges of safety nets, and inputs by WFP and other partners. Will have perspectives on next CP phase, and on GoM commitment to providing resources. Lesson learning from the evaluation Minister of Women and Social Affairs. Technical staff as necessary National Institute for Social Action (INAS) Overall supervision of the implementation of social programmes, and experimentation of different social protection programmes key informant - on implementation of social programmes. Lesson learning from the evaluation Head of INAS. Technical staff as necessary Technical Secretariat for Food and Nutrition Security (SETSAN) coordinating efforts around food security key informant - on development of baselines, risk mapping, and nutritional analysis. Lesson learning from the evaluation Head of SETSAN and technical staff as necessary Individual Interview Government decentralized level (Gaza and Tete) Education authorities at district and provincial level overseeing education sector performance, including implementation of school feeding, and liaising with other government departments at decentralized level key informant - on implementation of the school feeding component including on selection of schools, support processes (training), other processes and results. Will have perspective on challenges and achievements. May assist in facilitating field visits. School directors, administrative staff in schools, teachers, district education managers Group interviews 11 P a g e

12 INAS/SDMAS at district and provincial levels oversight of social action at district level (Note: this is usually only one person who is part of the district health office, so no selection needed) key informant on implementation, supervision and beneficiary selection, including on the inputs provided by WFP, process factors and results. Will have perspective on challenges and achievements. May assist in facilitating field visits. INAS provincial staff involved in social protection programmes INAS/SDMAS district officers District and Provincial Directorates of Health implementation of health plans key informant - on nutrition interventions Staff of health centres who received training and who provided and supervised nutrition efforts. Staff responsible for nutrition at district and provincial level. Staff responsible for nutrition in district and provincial hospitals. District Representatives of National Institute of Disaster Management (INGC) and Technical Secretariat for Food and Nutrition Security (SETSAN) building DRR capacity at grass roots Beneficiary - of WFP s capacity strengthening in this area Staff involved in conducting vulnerability baselines, risk mapping etc., who received training or guidance directly from WFP or WFP trained trainers District Service for Agriculture and Extension (SDAE) the selection of sites for DRR assets key informant District Engineer / Agricultural Officer 12 P a g e

13 District Services for Economic Activities (SDAE) Involved in CP field activities monitoring, profiling, selecting and training Farmers Organizations (FOs), market data collection and divulgation, economical/agrarian statistical data collection Promotion/divulgation of P4P opportunities Key informant on FO performances and local markets, beneficiary of WFP s capacity strengthening in post-harvest management, FO capacity building, quality Director and staff of SDAE Provincial Directorate of Agriculture (DPA) Monitoring of agricultural campaign and rural markets Promotion/divulgation of P4P opportunities Key informant Director of DPA Provincial Services of Rural Extension (SPER) Training of Trainers (gender issues, quality, warehouse management) Key informant on FO performances and local markets, beneficiary of WFP s capacity strengthening in post-harvest management, FO capacity building, quality Director and staff of SPER UN Country Team UNICEF Involved in social protection policy, education, and nutrition in Mozambique, and dialogue partner with WFP on Social protection policy Secondary stakeholder and Informants - on overall context, and delivering as one. User of the evaluation report for lesson learning purposes Nutrition programme officer Education programme officer Social Protection officer 13 P a g e

14 UNDP Office of the Resident Coordinator WHO UNAIDS FAO, IFAD, ILO, UNESCO, UNFPA, HABITAT supporting the implementation of UNDAF and interested in alignment of WFP with UNDAF Partner in the HIV/AIDS response. Strong focus on nutrition. coordinating the HIV/AIDS response Secondary stakeholder and Informant - on overall context, and delivering as one Secondary stakeholder and Informant - on overall context, health progress and priorities Secondary stakeholder and Informant - on overall context, and on HIV progress and priorities Secondary stakeholder and Informant - on overall and aid context World Bank Social protection partner Secondary stakeholder and Informant - on overall and aid context Resident coordinator or someone who represents him/her Nutrition programme officer Country Representative Programme officers as relevant (including social protection officers) Programme officer as relevant (including social protection officer) NGOs International Non Governmental Organizations (NGO) Direct responsibility for implementing interventions under the five component areas of the CP and programme related responsibilities key informants - in a position to provide information on the working relationship with WFP, the implementation of the activities, challenges faced, and will have inputs into the recommendations Relevant programme officers from Red Cross, World Relief, Samaritan s Purse with at least three organizations 14 P a g e

15 Local NGOs Direct responsibility for implementing interventions under the five component areas of the CP and programme related responsibilities key informants - in a position to provide information on the working relationship with WFP, the implementation of the activities, challenges faced, and will have inputs into the recommendations Relevant programme officers of Profamilia, Conselho Cristão de Moçambique (CCM), Associação Desenvolvimento Rural Mágoe, Olhando Esperança, Associação Moçambicana para o Desenvolvimento da Família (AMODEFA) Group interview Donors Funders of WFP Funders of WFP informant - on the relationship with WFP and the priorities moving forward Other donors involved in the sectors supported by WFP Observers, participants in policy discussion (from various sectors). Involved in discussions on overall priorities for the country Secondary stakeholders and informants - on overall donor context CIDA portfolio manager Belgium portfolio manager Common Funds Deputy Resident Coordinator for the UN Relevant portfolio managers in the United Kingdom (UK) Department for International Development (DFID), European Union (EU), French Cooperation, Netherlands Embassy, Irish Government, Italian Cooperation, Norway, Sweden, Japanese Cooperation, and USAID (at least three interviews) Others Government of Brazil and the Brazil/WFP Centre of Excellence Promoting rolling out of school feeding across different contexts. Key partners for the school feeding component Secondary stakeholder - interested in learning from the evaluation findings on School Feeding Key liaison person for Mozambique Daisy Vasconcelos FNDE/ABC Brasil consultante Global Initiatives/ Networks Involved in promoting nutrition in Mozambique Secondary stakeholder - interested in selected findings Focal points for REACH, SUN, GAIN at country level 15 P a g e