United Nations Development Programme (September 2014)

Transcription

1 United Nations Development Programme Technical Note on the Refinement of the Global Programme Results and Resources Framework and Development of the Monitoring & Evaluation Plan (September 2014) The Global Programme is the architecture that allows UNDP to provide coherent global policy advice and programme support services, based on country and regional programme experiences and drawing on the pool of evidence, knowledge and expertise gained by UNDP across all development settings. (DP/GP/3) The Global Programme facilitates development effectiveness and strengthens UNDP s contribution towards the achievement of Strategic Plan results. At the first regular session 2014, the Executive Board approved the UNDP Global Programme, (DP/GP/3 and DP/GP/3/Corr.1 and its Annex). The same decision (2014/2) requested UNDP to improve, in consultation with Member States, the quality of the results and resources framework of the global programme in order to capture the specific contributions of the global programme to the overarching vision of the UNDP strategic plan, ). This paper describes the approach for refining the Global Programme Results and Resources Framework (RRF), and for developing the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan to measure the contributions of the Global Programme to the UNDP Strategic Plan. OVERVIEW The Global Programme RRF includes select Strategic Plan development results based on the prioritisation of global issues, and relevant organizational effectiveness and efficiency results commensurate with the functions of the Global Programme. The Global Programme contributions are more direct for development outputs that are global in nature (primarily under outcome 7), compared to those that are country-focused (primarily under outcomes 1-6). The RRF is being refined to simplify the language, standardize its formulation, and break down the composite indicators. Moreover, the refinement will ensure consistency with the Strategic Plan Integrated Results and Resources framework (IRRF) currently under revision The correlation between the deliverables of the Global Programme and Strategic Plan outputs can be made by gathering evidence on the quality of the products and services, how they were used by Country Offices to improve programming quality, and how this has led to a change or achievement of national, regional, and global results. Evidence of this correlation will be captured using a Monitoring and Evaluation Plan which will include specific indicators on quality, use and change. It will also elaborate on the specific information to be collected, source of data, its frequency, and responsibility, etc. The embedding of Global Programme indicators in the relevant corporate system at country, regional and global levels will ensure that progress is systematically monitored for decision making, and reports are evidence-based. Evaluations will help to verify the data collected through these systems. 1

2 1. Refinement of the Global Programme Results and Resources Framework The Global Programme RRF includes a select number of Strategic Plan development outputs based on global priorities (i.e. Post 2015 and Sustainable Development Goals), relevant organisational effectiveness and efficiency results (i.e. quality programming for results) and indicators to measure the concrete deliverables of the Global Programme (i.e. policies, strategies, guidance). Following the decision of the Executive Board in January 2014, the Global Programme RRF is being refined with a focus on: Standardization of the indicator formulation to ensure consistency and systematisation. Original GP indicators Corporate guidance on Policy guidance on Global guidance and recommendation on Comprehensive global guidance on Possible refinement Guidance on Guidance on Guidance on Guidance on Simplification of the indicator language to ensure clarity and measurability of indicators. Example: SP Output 2.2. Institutions and systems enabled to address awareness, prevention and enforcement of anti-corruption measures across sectors and stakeholders Original GP indicator Policy and guidance developed, tested and ready for application to increase transparency and effectiveness of resource management in the extractive industries sector (including increased public access to information on contracting and revenues) Possible refinement Policy and guidance developed and shared to increase transparency and effectiveness of resource management in the extractive industries sector (details to be captured in the M&E plan, etc.) Breakdown of composite indicators to ensure essential elements are measured and monitored. Example: SP Output 4.3. Evidence-informed national strategies and partnerships to advance gender equality and women s empowerment Original GP indicator Analysis conducted on sex-disaggregated data and gender statistics, knowledge and experience codified and shared, and advocacy undertaken to strengthen linkages between gender equality / women s empowerment and development (including women s legal rights, GBV programming, and economic empowerment). Possible refinement Evidence collected and shared to demonstrate linkages between gender equality / women s empowerment and development Advocacy undertaken to strengthen linkages between gender equality / women s empowerment and development. Since the Global Programme RRF is derived from the Strategic Plan IRRF which is undergoing a revision itself, the final refined version of the Global Programme RRF can be expected following the finalization of the Strategic Plan IRRF. 2

3 2. Conceptual Approach for Measuring the Global Programme Contribution to the Strategic Plan In order to measure the contribution of the Global Programme to the Strategic Plan results, it is necessary to gather evidence on the quality of the products and services delivered through the Global Programme, how they were used by Country Offices to improve programme and project quality, and how this has led to a change in terms of the achievement of national, regional, and global results articulated in the Strategic Plan (See diagram 1). Only when a Country Office has used Global Programme guidance (i.e. methodologies and tools) in the design and/or implementation of a project, can it be argued that these products actually contributed to higher quality country programming and eventually to the achievement of a national result. Global Programme services provided by policy advisors would also help to improve the quality of the project and increase the potential for it to contribute to positive change at the national level. These services include mission support to assist the Country Office in adapting the methodology and tool to the country context, and follow-up support through desk review of the project document to ensure it meets corporate standards. Whether the results have been achieved, and how they have been achieved, would in turn inform the development of future Global Programme products and services. 3

4 For example, under the country-focused Outcome 1 Growth and development are inclusive and sustainable, incorporating productive capacities that create employment and livelihoods for the poor and excluded, Output 1.1 is National and sub-national systems and institutions enabled to achieve structural transformation of productive capacities that are sustainable and employment- and livelihoods- intensive. One of the key contributions of the Global Programme towards this output is related to schemes and innovative approaches that support the poor to diversify output, expand value addition, and sustain and create jobs and livelihoods. The role of the Global Programme is to develop or identify these schemes and approaches based on UNDP s experience from around the world, test them to find out what works or does not work well and in which contexts, refine them and share them widely with programme countries and Country Offices along with practical guidance. The Global Programme may also develop collaborative networks at the global or regional levels, to find new ways of tackling unemployment. Sustainable development policy advisors and livelihood experts would work with a Country Office through support missions to help them adapt these schemes and approaches to make them more relevant for their purposes. Institutional development advisors would also help identify key institutions and conduct capacity assessments to inform the design of projects. Collectively, these efforts would lead to better quality of projects that strengthen national systems and institutions for structural transformation, and eventually lead to inclusive and sustainable growth and development (See diagram 2). 4

5 For the global-focused Outcome 7, the contributions of the Global Programme can be defined and measured in terms of direct achievements of Strategic Plan outputs at the global level (e.g. Output 7.1). For example, policy advisors directly coordinate and facilitate dialogues on the Post-2015 agenda, produce research and analysis to inform dialogues, distill and utilise lessons learned, and provide support to inter-agency mechanisms and processes. These directly contribute to the Strategic Plan Output 7.1: reaching a global consensus on the completion of MDGs and the Post-2015 development agenda. Global thought leadership, advocacy, and research would also be used at regional and country levels, and global consensus would contribute to development debates and actions prioritising poverty, inequality and exclusion at all levels. (See diagram 3) 3. Global Programme Monitoring and Evaluation Plan The above conceptual framework will form the basis of the Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Plan of the Global Programme. The plan will focus on measuring the quality and use of the policy and programme support products and services and the change it has contributed to, in order to gather evidence on how the Global Programme has contributed directly or indirectly to the achievements of the Strategic Plan results. The plan will include an elaboration of the information to be collected, source of data, its frequency, and responsibility, etc. Data collection and tracking of the three dimensions (i.e. quality, use, and change) will be integrated into existing and new corporate systems. For example, UNDP s corporate platform, is currently being enhanced to host the results planning, monitoring and reporting of programmes and projects, including the Global Programme. It is also expected to link results achieved at the project, programme, department/unit and corporate levels, and integrate the Quality Assurance system and tools 5

6 such as the Service Tracker and Partner Survey. The embedding of Global Programme indicators in the appropriate corporate system at country, regional and global levels will ensure that progress is monitored systematically throughout the organisation, and the information generated is used in decision making. Moreover, reporting will have a stronger evidence base. Evaluations including the Global Programme mid-term review and evaluation which will be conducted in conjunction with the Strategic Plan mid-term review and evaluation, as well as various thematic and project evaluations will complement these monitoring efforts and objectively verify the information. 6

7 Illustrative Example for Monitoring and Evaluating Quality, Use and Change QUALITY OF GLOBAL PROGRAMME PRODUCTS/SERVICES Question Indicator(s) Source/ Data collection System Quality of technical guidance/ advisory services provided by GP policy advisors % of CO staff who perceive the quality of technical guidance /advisory services delivered by GP policy advisors through field mission support as: i. Outstanding, ii. Satisfactory, iii. Weak (disaggregrated by type of staff) i. Service Tracker ii. Annual reporting Frequency i. Ongoing ii. Annually Responsibility i. and ii. CO service users Evaluations SP/ GP midterm review & evaluation % of CO staff who perceive the quality of technical guidance /advisory services delivered by GP policy advisors through indirect support (i.e. teleconferencing, webinar, ) as: i. Outstanding, ii. Satisfactory, iii. Weak (disaggregrated by type of staff) USE OF GLOBAL PROGRAMME PRODUCTS /SERVICES TO IMPROVE PROGRAMMING Question Indicator(s) Source/ Data collection System Frequency Responsibility Extent of use of Extent of use of knowledge management online i. KM online i. Ongoing i. Knowledge knowledge platforms, as measured by: tracker management management online a. # of users on Teamworks Team platforms b. # of participants of e-webinars c. # of participants in e-discussions d. # of participants in public online dialogues Evaluations Knowledge Management Global Project Evaluation Extent of use, adoption, integration of GP products in programmes and projects % of programmes/ projects which have used, adopted or integrated (to be defined) GP products in conceptualizing, designing or implementing programmes/projects (disaggregated by strategy, policy, guidance, etc.) i. Programme QA ii. Project QA iii. Annual reporting i. Ongoing ii. Ongoing iii. Annually i. ii. iii.programme and project staff at HQ, regional and country levels SP/ GP midterm review & evaluation, outcome /thematic evaluations, project evaluations Quality of programmes and projects % of programmes that meet corporate quality criteria % of projects that meet corporate quality criteria i. Programme QA ii. Project QA i. Ongoing ii. Ongoing i. ii. iii.programme and project staff at HQ, regional and country levels SP/ GP midterm review & evaluation, outcome /thematic evaluations, project evaluations 7

8 CHANGE AS A RESULT OF USING GLOBAL PROGRAMME PRODUCTS/SERVICES Question Indicator(s) Source/ Data collection System Frequency Responsibility % of COs who perceive that products and services provided through the GP advisors contributed a change at the national level: i. Significantly, ii. Moderately, iii. Minimally, and iv. not at all Extent to which GP products and services contributed to results Evaluations Annual Annually CO service users SP/ GP midterm review & evaluation, outcome /thematic evaluations, project evaluations Extent to which UNDP contributed to national results % of national partners who respond that UNDP contributed to a change at the national level: i. Significantly, ii. Moderately, iii. Minimally, and iv. not at all Partner Survey Annually or bi-annually (TBC) CO senior management (to provide list) and national partners (to fill out survey) SP/ GP midterm review & evaluation, outcome /thematic evaluations, project evaluations Achievement of Strategic Plan results % of project outputs which are reported as achieved or on track Results Annually Programme and project staff at HQ, regional and country levels SP/ GP midterm review & evaluation, outcome /thematic evaluations, project evaluations 8