1. Presentation Peer Review Sub-group
Margareta de Goys and Helen Wedgwood
UNEG 2015 AGM

2. Update - Conducted and planned Peer reviews
Agency
Status
WFP
Finalized with Lessons learned document
GEF
UN Women
Finalized. Lessons learned document from UN Women
WIPO
Cancelled by WIPO (not ready)
WHO
Postponed due to ongoing internal change process, including development of new evaluation policy
OCHA
Postponed by OCHA (considered premature) until 2016
ICAO
Postponed by ICAO (not ready) until 2016
UNCDF
Pending the development of new policy
UNRWA
Planned for 2015, ToR under preparation
UNODC
Confirmed for second half of 2015
ITC

3. 2014/15 Outputs Draft Peer Review Guidance Document
Proposal for Peer Review Funding Mechanism
Management Response to Lessons Learned study

4. Draft Guidance Document
Team effort
Encompasses guidance on use of peer review and key principles, how it fits with other review processes, stages of a peer review and roles and responsibilities(process diagram), how to intitiate a peer review and panel composition, drafting the ToR and adaption to the PR framework and budget and other resources.
Proposed that the Guidance will be tested (possibly expended on conduct aspects) during the 2015 peer reviews and further developed for submission to 2016 AGM

5. Proposal Peer Review Funding Mechanism
Purpose to strengthen ownership of UNEG of the peer review process and to help to ensure that also less “resourced” functions are able to benefit from a per review
The Peer Review process would become more independent and transparent as contracting of PR consultant could be handled by Secretariat (but also by a funding UNEG agency)
Mainly for UNEG and EVALNET members. Earmarking of UNEG contributions should be possible
Panel members still expected to cover own costs
Managed by PR Sub-group and by UNEG Secretariat (8% GMS)

6. PROPOSED UNEG MANAGEMENT RESPONSE TO: THE 2013 LESSONS-LEARNED STUDY OF PEER REVIEWS of UNEG EVALUATION FUNCTIONS

7. BACKGROUND Study authors: Ian Davies & Julia Brummer 2013;
UNEG AGM 2013 agreed recommendations be considered by the PR (Task Force) Sub Group;
2014 PR Sub-Group proposes a formal management response:
Transparency
Linkages to UNEG Strategy & across SO/ workstreams
Systematic follow-up
Timeliness & Use – PR Process Guidance development
Formal Mgt Response – good practice anyway, but also helps make the linkages necessary, encourage systematic follow-up.
Very timely to feed into rest of PRSG’s work on Process Guidance
Limitations – not discussed beyond PRSG yet. Hence requested to bring to UNEG AGM table.
Recommendations were condensed to reduce repetition& overlap;
Tabling at UNEG AGM – For endorsement overall, but also because:
Several beyond remit of PR Sug-Group only and touch on bigger UNEG strategic choices – require UNEG agreement;
Some require follow-up and/or lead by other SO’s

8. RECOMMENDATION 1: PR PURPOSE
PR alone can’t provide assurance of UN evaluation quality’s role in UNEG’s wider professionalization strategy (SO1). PR should:
be a part of a wider UNEG Professionalization Strategy (SO1)
reduce focus on assurance to donors
emphasize capacity building role of PR
MR: PARTIALLY AGREED
Agree should be part of wider professionalization strategy;
PR to maintain balance of accountability (assurance) & learning;
PR’s assurance role of interest to all MS & Governing Bodies;
SO 1 linkage – requires agreement on Professionalization Strategy.
REC 1 is over-arching re overall PURPOSE and complex – several sub-elements
Some sub elements agreed (green); others disagreed by PRSG (red)
Overall = yellow partially agreed
Important UNEG agrees on proposed MR – retain A/C & Learning Balance, even while part of a wider Professionalisation Strategy.
Assurance function of PRs important for all – but agree it needs strengthening and that PR mechanism as currently constructed can’t alone provide assurance of UN evaluation functions.

9. RECS 2 - 4: Professionalization & PR Focus
2. UNEG to map out a Professionalization strategy, linked with external professional evaluation networks. 3. PR balance to focus less on assurance & more on professionalization by peer exchange/support. 4. Revisit PR framework in line with agreed Professionalization strategy.
This group of Recs concern next level down: professionalization and its implications for PR’s focus.
Check at UNEG AGM: degree of agreement on SO1 Professionalisation sub-group strategy?
If agreed, then PRSG to consider focus balance of PR in light of Prof. Strategy – this would be in 2016 – 17, building on piloting of the PR Process Guidance also, and its further development (see later recs re assessment criteria)

10. RECS 5 & 6: Assessment Criteria; Norms & Standards
Make PR assessment criteria more explicit, especially re. evaluation quality control and assurance systems.
Update UNEG Norms & Standards, especially re. quality control & assurance, and emerging evaluation methods/standards.
Recs 5&6 focus on technical issues:
Rec 5: Partially addressed by Process Guidance, but further work needed in this in 2015 to address the assessment criteria & measurement for evaluation product quality in PRs.
Recall that the PR CORE ASSESSMENT QUESTION: Are the Agency’s evaluation function and its products independent, credible and useful for learning & accountability purposes, assessed against UN N&S, and the evidence base?
REC 6: Current N&S too broad to provide a sufficiently robust evaluation quality assessment framework – gap that needs filling in a future N&S update, and PRs currently don’t have a standard metric for assessment of evaluation product quality- limitation of assurance functionality.
REC 6 - Cross refers to SO1 – check UNEG agreement to proposed way forward by SO1 sub group.

11. RECS 7 & 8: PR Mechanism: Access, Funding & Panel
7. Develop new funding mechanism to:
enable more equitable access/participation
support PRs as compulsory and regular part of UNEG framework
8. Review Panel Composition & Selection:
smaller number for cost & process efficiency
selection for professional over UN system knowledge
Recs 7 & 8 focus more on PR system & management:
REC 7: need for funding mechanism fully agreed. See Funding Mechanism Proposal, which needs agreement at this AGM, and will take time to fully achieve required improvement in PR access.
However move away from VOLUNTARY to COMPULSORY use of PR = MAJOR SHIFT  needs UNEG discussion.
REC 8: Process guidance addresses appropriate number and balance of professional and institutional knowledge, and also greater clarity on selection process. One size doesn’t fit all. Institutional knowledge important as well as evaluation professional knowledge.

12. Next Steps UNEG feedback & guidance requested:
Overall management response
Endorsement of proposed ‘Agreed Recs’ & ‘Disagreed’
Discussion of Recs with strategic implications beyond PRSG remit.
Agreement on forward handling if further discussion needed
THANKYOU

13. Proposal - Peer review Sub-Group Work Plan 2015/16
Manage/”conduct” 3 Peer Reviews (UNWRA, ITC and UNODC)
Identify and plan for 2016 Peer Reviews
Pilot and further develop PR Guidance document (conduct and incorporating reflections lessons learned notes and any revision N&S))
Manage Peer Review Funding Mechanism
Monitor and promote the implementaion of the Management Response

14. AGM feedback /decisions needed on:
Guidance document and piloting
Funding mechanism
Management Response
Continuation of the PR Sub-group
UNEG heads to indicate interest in 2016 peer review