Formative Evaluation of the UNEP Medium Term Strategy 2014-2017
The evaluation encompasses both the development process and the substance of the UNEP Medium Term Strategy (MTS) 2014-2017, and includes the Programmes of Work (PoWs) for 2014-2015 and 2016-2017, the Programme Framework (PF) documents for each Subprogramme, their associated project concepts and approved Project Documents (ProDocs). The evaluation is based on careful review of draft and approved versions of the MTS 2014-2017, the PoWs for 2014-2015 and 2016-2017, the seven PF documents for the MTS period and all ProDocs approved between January 2011 and May 20141 and a sample of ProDocs approved between May 2014 and January 2015. It also considered planning related guidance documents, presentations and correspondence by the Office for Operations, and minutes of Task Team, Senior Management Team (SMT) and UNEP Committee of Permanent Representatives (CPR) meetings. The evaluation team conducted interviews and held informal discussions with staff in the Office for Operations (OfO), the Programme Strategy and Planning Team (PSPT) and the Regional Support Office (RSO), Task Team members and Subprogramme Coordinators (SPCs).
Mid-Term Evaluation of the UNEP Medium Term Strategy 2010-2013
The Evaluation Office has released a Mid-Term Evaluation of the UNEP Medium Term Strategy (MTS) 2010-2013. The evaluation was conducted between June 2012 and January 2013 to assess the extent to which the new MTS has been successful in reorienting UNEP’s programme to address key global environmental challenges, and in guiding the associated institutional reform process designed to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the organisation in programme delivery.
In this regard, the Evaluation is essentially “two in one” - on the one hand looking at the MTS’ impact on the actual programmes that UNEP is delivering (the “what”), and on the other at the MTS’ influence on the mechanisms used to deliver the programme (the “how”). The Evaluation identifies key successes and challenges in MTS implementation, and provides lessons and recommendations aimed at improving future programme implementation. To achieve this, the Evaluation focussed on four key aspects of MTS implementation: (i) The strategic relevance of the MTS, (ii) The progress made by UNEP in achieving the anticipated MTS outcomes and impacts, (iii) The business processes, systems and structures, and (iv) The human resources and financial mechanisms.
Mid-Term Evaluation of the UNEP Medium Term Strategy 2010-2013 – Working Paper on Business Processes, Systems, and Structures
Mid-Term Evaluation of the UNEP Medium Term Strategy 2010-2013 – Working Paper on Effectiveness and Impact
Mid-Term Evaluation of the UNEP Medium Term Strategy 2010-2013 – Working Paper on Relevance
Mid-Term Evaluation of the UNEP Medium Term Strategy 2010-2013 – Working Paper on Human and Financial Resources
Formative Evaluation of the UNEP Programme of Work 2010-2011
The Evaluation Office has released a Formative Evaluation of the UNEP Programme of Work for 2010-2011. Formative evaluations are conducted in the early years of program/policy delivery in order to assess the degree to which appropriate programs, processes, and procedures have been put in place to ensure effective and efficient expenditure of resources. By conducting formative evaluations, it is expected that any necessary corrective action will be taken early in the programme/policy implementation process so that the likelihood of achieving expected outcomes is increased.
This formative evaluation is intended to provide findings early in the first biennium, based on an analysis of the causal relationships embedded in the projects within each Programme Framework to understand whether these projects are optimally linked to the Expected Accomplishments (EAs). The primary objective of the evaluation is to provide information to the respective subprogrammes on the appropriateness of design and delivery of the Programme of Work early in the process when changes or adaptations can be made to optimize the likelihood of success in achieving the Expected Accomplishments.
By mapping out each project’s causal pathways it became clear how these projects are likely to contribute to the EAs and whether the interventions utilize common actors, are mutually reinforcing and converge /synergize with one another to deliver against the EAs. At the same time the analyses highlighted possible linkages from projects within a Programme Framework to other EAs. It is hoped that such feedback may induce adaptations to programme implementation that enhance the likelihood of success in achieving the EAs and improve future UNEP work planning processes. The scope of the evaluation includes analysis of selected programme frameworks included in the UNEP PoW of 2010-2011.
This evaluation has been widely discussed throughout the organization and has been seen as an essential input into the preparation of the 2014-2017 Medium-Term Strategy.