PARIS21 Light Evaluation Report to the Steering Committee meeting in April 2006 on the evaluation and with recommendations on the future of PARIS21, including.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ENTITIES FOR A UN SYSTEM EVALUATION FRAMEWORK 17th MEETING OF SENIOR FELLOWSHIP OFFICERS OF THE UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM AND HOST COUNTRY AGENCIES BY DAVIDE.
Advertisements

Sub-regional Training Workshop on
Guidance Note on Joint Programming
Delivering as One UN Albania October 2009 – Kigali.
WTO Workshop ESTABLISHMENT OF AN EFFECTIVE TRADE FACILITATION TASK FORCE Terms of Reference and Objective Setting World Trade Organisation (Geneva) Stephen.
EuropeAid PARTICIPATORY SESSION 2: Managing contract/Managing project… Question 1 : What do you think are the expectations and concerns of the EC task.
Demand Side Planning Considerations on the Skills Planning Mechanism Presentation in Policy Roundtable LMIP Singizi Consulting March 2014.
Independent External Evaluation of UNESCO Presentation to Joint Meeting of the PX and FA Commissions.
Progress Toward Impact Overall Performance Study of the GEF Aaron Zazueta GEF Evaluation Office Hanoi, March 10, 2010.
Preparation of Institutional and Human Resources Directory and Assessment of Capacity of Regional Secretariat and National Nodes Simba Sibanda Troparg.
Enhancing GEF National Coordination, Communications & Outreach Uganda’s Experience: The National Convention Coordination Group (NCCG) The National Operational.
GEF Expanded Constituency Workshop 5 to 6 November 2012 New Delhi, India Roles and Responsibilities of Council Members and Focal Points.
The Hungarian system of ex post and on-going evaluation focusing on Structural Funds Kinga Kenyeres, Evaluation Division6-7 May, 2010 National Development.
TEMPUS IV- THIRD CALL FOR PROPOSALS Recommendation on how to make a good proposal TEMPUS INFORMATION DAYS Podgorica, MONTENEGRO 18 th December 2009.
The proposed plan of work of the « implementers consortium »: objectives, methods, expected outcomes, timelines, partners Waranya Teokul (Thailand) and.
PARTNER REPORTING ON STATISTICAL SUPPORT (PRESS) June 2008.
Project Overview, Objectives, Components and Targeted Outcomes
1 RBM Background Development aid is often provided on a point to point basis with no consistency with countries priorities. Development efforts are often.
TEMPUS IV- Quick recommendations on how to make a good proposal Jordanian National Tempus Information Day 15/12/2010 Jordanian University.
Assessment on the implementation of the Mediterranean Strategy for Sustainable Development Dr Nicola Cantore Overseas Development Institute,
WMO Blue Peace - Water Security in the Middle East: Strategic Management of Hydrological and Meteorological Data and Information Product Generation Al-Hamndou.
Egyptian Environmental Affairs Agency National Capacity Self Assessment (GEF/UNDP) The Third GEF Assembly Side Event – 30 th August,2006 Cape town Integrating.
Meeting of SCB Donors Paris, 29 April 2011 Report of the 8th meeting of the TFSCB Advisory Panel (14 – 18 March 2011) Chandrakant A. Patel Jean-Louis Bodin.
PACIFIC AID EFFECTIVENESS PRINCIPLES. Purpose of Presentation Provide an overview of Pacific Principles on Aid Effectiveness Provide an overview of Pacific.
April_2010 Partnering initiatives at country level Proposed partnering process to build a national stop tuberculosis (TB) partnership.
IPA Funds Monitoring and Evaluation December Bölgesel Rekabet Edebilirlik Operasyonel Programı’nın Uygulanması için Kurumsal Kapasitenin Oluşturulmasına.
PARIS21 EVALUATION Progress so far PARIS21 Steering Committee meeting OECD Conference Centre 4 June 2009.
PARIS21 Steering Committee26 April 2006 PARIS21 Steering Committee, Paris, 26 April 2006 PARIS21 Work Programme for 2006.
DETERMINE Working document # 4 'Economic arguments for addressing social determinants of health inequalities' December 2009 Owen Metcalfe & Teresa Lavin.
Project financed under Phare EUROPEAN UNION MERI/ NCDTVET - PIU Material produced under Phare 2006 financial support Phare TVET RO RO2006/
Peer Learning Event on national Lifelong Guidance Policy Forums 4th-5th of June 2008, Thessaloniki With the support of the Lifelong Learning Programme.
The implementation programme for the 2008 SNA and supporting statistics UNECE special session on National Accounts for economies in transition Geneva,
Regional Workshop to disseminate Water Supply and Sanitation Standards of Service, adapted to LDCs Préparation to the ISO TC 224 Drafts Standards test.
ESPON 2013 Programme Info Day on Calls and Partner Café Call for Proposals on Targeted Analysis A Decade of Territorial Evidence.
Entrepreneurship Indicators Steering Group Project Governance Proposed Mandate, Goals and Operational Arrangements Tim Davis, OECD Statistics Directorate.
INTERACTIVE TRAINING ON IDP FOR COUNCILLORS ________________________
National Agencies’ contribution to the evaluation of Grundtvig Action and to the National Evaluation Report on Socrates Programme Socrates - Grundtvig.
FAO Turkey Partnership Programme (FTPP) FAO Final Evaluation of the FTPP Summary for FTPP Programming Meeting, 14 December
Evaluating the quality of vital statistics UN Expert Group Meeting, June 2011 Dr AJ Lanyon Australian Bureau of Statistics 30 June 2011.
More Timely, Credible and Cost Effective Performance Information on Multilateral Partners Presented by: Goberdhan Singh Director of the Evaluation Division.
Joint Evaluation of the Paris Declaration, Phase 2Core Team Country Evaluations Generic Terms of Reference & Common Evaluation Matrix Presentation to International.
1 Governance strategy for the Washington City Group Comments on draft proposal by Howard Meltzer (UK) February Brussels.
Michael Schmoeltzer Member of ERGEG Gas Working Group GIE Annual Conference, 6/7 May 2009, Groningen ACER & ENTSOG and their interaction.
An Integrated Approach to the Future Role of the RCARO in Support of the RCA Programme.
Country-led Joint Evaluation Dutch ORET/MILIEV Programme in China NCSTE Country-led Joint Evaluation Dutch ORET/MILIEV Programme in China Chen Zhaoying.
THE INTRODUCTION AND SUPPORT OF RESEARCH PROJECTS AS PART OF THE FUTURE ROLE OF THE RCARO Dr Waqar Ahmad Dr John Easey.
Asia-Pacific Network for the Coordination of Statistical Training
Annex III to BS/SC/PDF/A(2003)1
Formulating and implementing national adaptation plans (NAPs)
Achim Hopbach President ENQA
Progress & Challenges in Aid Co-ordination & Delivery
Тowards regionally-based standards of qualifications
CAROSAI’S Strategic Planning Experience
DeLoG Evaluation results 2016
Evaluation plans for programming period in Poland
Helene Skikos DG Education and Culture
Post-2020 discussions 1. State of play of discussions 2. On-going work 3. Questions for debate.
Key components of an NSDS
EU Marine Strategy DG Environment B.1.
REFIT Platform 20/02/2019 Diversity Europe Group.
Roles and Responsibilities of Council Members and Focal Points
Nuclear Cooperation in Asia and the role of RCARO
Monitoring Effective Development Co-operation: Tailoring for fragile and conflict affected situations 16th Steering Committee Meeting 30 November 2018,
DEPARTMENT OF ARTS AND CULTURE
General Discussion Conclusions:
SFIC and the international dimension of the ERA Framework Riitta Mustonen – SFIC Chair / Academy of Finland NORDFORSK SEMINAR 28/2/2012.
League of Advanced European Neutron Sources
EUnetHTA Assembly May 2018.
Innovative WASH Management Models for the Urban Poor in Ghana
eContentplus 2007 Work Programme
Presentation transcript:

PARIS21 Light Evaluation Report to the Steering Committee meeting in April 2006 on the evaluation and with recommendations on the future of PARIS21, including its orientation, objectives, and priority activities

PARIS21 Light Evaluation : Background A sub-group of Steering Committee members (Review Sub- Group) carry out a review of PARIS21 for the years provide recommendations on the future of PARIS21, its orientation, objectives, and priority activities report back to the Steering Committee meeting in April 2006 on the evaluation and with recommendations on the future of PARIS21

PARIS21 Light Evaluation : Methodology Main steps in procedure followed by the Review Sub-Group Propose evaluation questions to facilitator Evaluator/Facilitator to submit an inception report Answer the evaluation questions Approve the report analysis of answers on evaluation questions Report back to the Steering Committee Recommendations on the future of PARIS21

PARIS21 Light Evaluation Conclusions 1 A desk research oriented analysis of the outputs and inputs of PARIS21 1. The NSDS approach can be considered as successful. 2 a. The funding of the priorities for the PARIS21 secretariat appear to be consistent with the Consortium. b. PARIS21 secretariat has also built on network synergies with specific partner /consortium agencies.

PARIS21 Light Evaluation Conclusions 2 PARIS21 Relevance and Effectiveness in general satisfactory, some nuances. The activities and work programme of PARIS21 are appropriate to the purpose of PARIS21. The programme has met stakeholders’ requests however to the extent possible given the number and diversity of the requests, that work plan and activities were consistent with the priorities of major stakeholders. PARIS21 has demonstrated a high adaptability to the new situation created by NSDS development.

PARIS21 Light Evaluation Conclusions 3 Effectiveness : overall opinion that this has to be given also a positive mark, however, based on a wide diversity of remarks with strong and weaker nuances of this positive outcome.

The impact of actions is seen globally on the positive side; points where critical remarks were set are elements still to be appraised in more detail when this is feasible after a longer time period. Therefore, conclusions on the effectiveness are positive, however with a cautious approach on pinpointing the steps still to be made and possible future pitfalls. PARIS21 Light Evaluation Conclusions 4

PARIS21 Light Evaluation: Recommendation 1 To consolidate this direction, the high priority on the NSDS as it has developed in the last years, and to make it more visible in the objectives of PARIS21, in such a form that it is recommended to expand the mandate of PARIS21, to better facilitate NSDS development.

PARIS21 Light Evaluation: Recommendation 2 The emphasis on NSDS should not limit the advocacy work. The advocacy work should be considered an essential element in the NSDS and prioritised as being a part of it.

PARIS21 Light Evaluation: Recommendation 3 To improve the conditions for better cooperation between the secretariat of PARIS21 and the involved partners. To reach a better level of cooperation the coordination role of PARIS21 in this context has to be expanded.

PARIS21 Light Evaluation: Recommendation 4 To ask a small drafting group – focussed around the founding fathers of PARIS21 – to draft a new version of the mandate for the coming period and to provide advice on possible changes in the institutional setting of the PARIS21 secretariat.

Thank you for your attention