EVALUATION Evaluation of UNDP Assistance to Conflict-affected Countries UNDP Executive Board Informal Session 4 January 2007

EVALUATION Rationale for evaluation  Crisis Prevention and Recovery is one of the five practice areas of UNDP  Nearly 40% of the UNDP global expenditure is in countries receiving BCPR assistance (2005 data)  Requested by the UNDP Executive Board

EVALUATION Objectives To evaluate UNDP’s assistance to conflict- affected countries To assess UNDP’s contribution to human security and human development. To look at UNDP’s role in coordination and partnership as part of UN System To make forward-looking recommendations

EVALUATION Scope and Approach UNDP assistance to conflict-affected countries since 2000 All efforts by UNDP, not only BCPR activities, in conflict- affected countries Case studies in Afghanistan, DR Congo, Guatemala, Haiti, Sierra Leone, Tajikistan (countries with Security Council Mandates) 24 countries receiving BCPR assistance surveyed Analysis of human security trends (battle deaths, human rights violations, refugees and displaced persons and victims of natural and technological disasters)

EVALUATION Criteria  Relevance and positioning  Results and effectiveness  Efficiency  Management  Coordination  Substantive leadership and credibility

EVALUATION Key findings – context of international community International community helped stabilise conflicts and peace agreements Less successful in addressing structural conditions conducive to violent conflict - Weak states and weak civil society - Availability of small arms and unemployed young men - Large informal or illegal economy - Conflicts in neighboring states

EVALUATION Key findings: UNDP Supports wide range of activities with most effort on - recovery and reintegration - the restoration of state authority - justice and security sector reform Strategic leadership limited as rarely part of negotiations Emerging substantive expertise in governance and capacity-building but overextended Gap-filling and administrative functions useful but detracts UNDP from core development mandate

EVALUATION  Insufficient attention to gender and civil society  Dependency on non-core funding  Staff with specialized skills needed not only surge capacity  Limited analytical capacity to identify indicators or monitor trends  Demonstrated nimbleness and flexibility but perceived as opaque and bureaucratic  PIUs do not promote long-term sustainability Key findings: UNDP

EVALUATION Recommendations 1. Formulate a strategic vision together with other UN agencies, especially DPA for human security based on the following principles  Human rights, emphasizing rule of law, political participation and livelihoods  Legitimate political authority, building trust and engaging civil society  Coherence, integrating poverty reduction and human development  Bottom-up approach, involving women and civil society groups  Regional focus as conflicts spill across borders

EVALUATION Recommendations (Contd.) 2.Integrate development concerns within UN strategies for security.  The Administrator brief the Security Council  Include development assistance in assessed contributions to missions with Security Council mandate  Involve UNDP in negotiations of peace agreements and involve civil society and women’s groups  Give development concerns a stronger voice in integrated offices  Prioritize development concerns in the new Peace- Building Commission

EVALUATION 3. Build substantive capacity in core-areas of peace building Instead of adhoc gap-filling activities, build substantive capacity in UNDP in the following core areas:  Recovery and reintegration  Governance and capacity building  Justice and security sector reform  Poverty reduction and sustainable livelihoods Recommendations (Contd.)

EVALUATION 4. Improve the effectiveness of Implementation  Develop analytical capacity to understand specific conflicts  Improve outreach beyond capital cities  Strengthen internal UNDP decision-making mechanisms  Enhance specialization and management of human resources  Review financial and administrative procedures  Emphasize full transparency  Strengthen monitoring and evaluation Recommendations (Contd.)

EVALUATION Recommendations (Contd.) 5. Enhance Coordination and Partnerships Streamline and reduce coordination mechanisms Develop strategic framework for addressing structural conditions conducive to conflict rather than the management of funds. Develop key strategic partnerships with:  DPA and DPKO  Bretton Woods institutions to advocate scaling up UNDP’s innovative practices in countries  Civil society to guide formulation of UNDP’s strategies

EVALUATION Thank you!