project management by undp

Project Appraisal, Monitoring and Evaluation practices

of UNDP in Bangladesh

Presented by:Md. Wahid Sadik (37D#49)

Md. Rafiqul Islam (37D #55)

04/28/23 2Project appraisal, monitoring & evavluation practices of UNDP

Structure of the Presentation• UNDP Overview• Appraisal• Monitoring• Evaluation


About UNDP• Mark Malloch Brown, Administrator of UNDP

– From politics to security to public health, from crime to the environment, a growing agenda of development issues can no longer be managed within the boundaries of any single nation.

– Global, regional and national coalitions for action are emerging centered around the United Nations’ indispensable role.

– The UN can bring together governments, civil society, multinational corporations and multilateral organizations — coming together around particular issues of concern and looking for innovative ways to address them


Focus Area of UNDP1. Democratic Governance

– Parliamentary Development, Electoral Systems– Access to Justice, Human Rights & Information – Decentralization and Local Governance – Public Administration and Civil Service Reform

2. Poverty Reduction– Promote national initiatives to empower poor

3. HIV/AIDS– Prevent spread of HIV/AIDS & reduce impact– Advocate to place in national planning/budgets– Helps build national capacity by involving local effort,

thus promotes decentralized response


Focus Area of UNDP4. Crisis Prevention & Recovery

– Alignment: MDG & sustainable development– Work with partners to reduce incidence/impact of

disasters and violent conflicts– Establish solid foundations for peace/recovery from

crisis5. Energy & Environment

– Frameworks and strategies for sustainable• Energy services• Land mgt. to combat desertification and degradation• Development Energy and Environment

– Conservation/sustainable use of biodiversity


•Controlling Body•General Assembly•Economic & Social Council

•Activity•Establish UNDP overall policy•Review UNDP operation

•Manages UNPD•Accountable for UNDP operation to Executive Board for all aspects

•Global, Regional & Country level•Chairs UN Development Group (UNDG)

Structure of UNDP

UN, Secretary General

Executive Board (36 members)

Administrator

Resident Rep. (2)Resident Rep. (1) Resident Rep. (134)

•Representative at Country Level•Responsible to UN SG via Administrator•Responsibility

•Coordinate UN system operation•May represent UN organizations, funds, agency and dept.


Project Appraisal• Appraisal is the critical analytical review of

design and formulation of a program or project that leads to its approval or rejection.

• Documents necessary– Draft Project Document– Log-frame matrix (optional)


Project Appraisal / Procedure• Meeting of LPAC– Participants

• UN colleagues• Govt. representatives, national institutions• Other donors, civil society, target groups

– Policy: Considerations for quality programming– Minutes of meetings maintained for review– Ensuring the best possible formulation process

• One/more pre-PAC meetings involving UNDP persons

•Relevance•Stakeholder participation & partnership building•Contribution Poverty reduction•Gender Equality & advancement of woman•Protection & regeneration of environment•Governance•Most promising strategy

•Incorporation of lessons learned•Capacity Development and Sustainability•Feasibility and Technical soundness•Management arrangement•Integration, Synergy Complementary•Results orientation•Resources and inputs


Project Appraisal / Approval• Commitment to implement the project• Signed by– Representatives of UNDP– The government– The designated institution

• Advance authorization– Bureaucratic delays in securing signatures– Must be replaced within 60 days (validity)– Resident rep. must be satisfied that

• Formulation and appraisal processes competed• All UNDP policies have been complied with.


Project Appraisal / Approval• General Guideline– The maximum period covered is 7 years.– Waiver of competitive bidding

• Resident representative cannot approve if– It includes a person to be supervised by UNDP– Support to an infrastructure project proposed– Direct execution by UNDP proposed


Project Appraisal / Approval• Approval authority and accountability– Delegated to Resident representative

• Guided by the recommendation of the LPAC• Accountable to the Administrator• Any divergence should be recorded on file

• Dissemination of information– Resident rep. ensures approved project receive

• Wide publicity, particularly among stakeholders• Conformity with UNDP policy on disclosure of

information


Monitoring & Reporting• Monitoring

– A continuing aiming primarily to provide stakeholders with early indication of progress

• Reporting– Systematic and timely provision of essential information– Basis for decision making at appropriate mgt. levels

• Evaluation– Time-bound exercise to assess relevance, performance &

success of ongoing/completed programs systematically• Results

– Effects of a programs or project


Monitoring and Reporting• Why required?– Interactive and mutually supportive – Ensures accountability in the use of resources– Provide a clear basis for decision making – Extract practical lessons for future projects

• Policy– Policies applicable to all programs/projects– M&E must be integrated into project life-cycle– M&E exercises must be result-oriented


Monitoring• Policy on Monitoring– Responsibility of the designated institution– Country offices must undertake monitoring

actions to ensure effective & efficient impl.• Monitoring Tools– Field Visits– Annual Project Report– Tripartite Review– Terminal Report


Annual Project Report• An assessment of a project during a given

year by target groups, project mgt. team, govt., & UNDP

• Designated institution will prepare it in consultation with the stakeholders

• Purpose– Present stakeholders’ insights & proposals into

issues affecting the implementation of a project– An input for evaluation of a project– An input for the preparation of the annual and

country reviews of the country cooperation framework


Annual Project Report• Structure

Part I Numerical rating of project relevance and performance

Part IITextual assessment of the project focusing on major achievements, early evidence of success, issues and problems, recommendations and lessons learned.

Part IIISummary table - Resources & Expenditures

Summary table - Progress toward achieving expected results


Tripartite Review• To assess the progress of a project based on the

APR, and to take decisions on recommendations• A policy level meeting of parties involved

– Government– UNDP– The designated institution– Other main stakeholders

• Must be held once a year• A terminal tripartite review must be held towards

the end of program/project• Resident representative will organize the review


Terminal Report• APR prepared towards completion• Purpose– Same purposes as APR– Serve as a source of initial lessons from

experience and to recommend follow-up activity when necessary

DB

Regional Representative

Regional Bureau

Evaluation OfficeTerminal Report


Evaluation• Tool for learning and accountability• Undertaken on a selective basis• Purpose– Ensure an adequate number of projects from

which lessons can be drawn to support organizational learning and

– Ensure the magnitude of financial resources represented by projects evaluated to support the accountability of the administrator


Evaluation• Criteria

– When a project has a budget >= $1 million– Whenever an additional phase of assistance proposed– When UNDP has been supporting an institution for 10+

years• Evaluation can be skipped when

– The project has been canceled– The project has been evaluated by a development

partner covering concerns of UNDP adequately• Unacceptable reasons for not having an Evaluation

– Resource constraints– Project claimed to be successful– Technical review already conducted or planned– Projects completed and closed


Evaluation/Responsibilities• Country Offices

– Ensures mandatory evaluations as indicated in their respective country level evaluation plans.

– Submit copies of evaluation reports to Evaluation Office and Regional Bureau

• Regional bureau– Monitor implementation of country level evaluation plans

by country offices– Follow up submissions of evaluations reports

• Evaluation Office: – Reports the Administrator on the compliance rate for

mandatory evaluation (based on country level evaluation plans and reports it receives)


Country Level Evaluation Plan• Identifies different evaluations to help

assessing relevance, performance and success of UNDP cooperation with the program country

• Objective– Ensure that country offices comply with policies

on evaluation– To drawn lessons for future projects

• Each country office must prepare a detailed, country level plan covering the evaluation activities for a rolling 3 years


Evaluation: Types1. By agent

a) Internal or Self-evaluation: By project internal personsb) External or Independent Evaluation

2. By timinga) Mid-term Evaluation: At mid-point of projectb) Terminal Evaluation: At project completionc) Ex-post Evaluation: Two+ years after project completion

3. By scopea) Project Evaluation: A single projectb) Programme Evaluation: A programme, or a portfolio of

activities under the same managementc) Sectoral Evaluation: Cluster evaluation of projects /

programmes in a sector or sub-sectord) Thematic Evaluation: Addressing a particular theme across

sectors


Evaluation: Type (specific issues)

• Policy evaluation– Evaluation of projects dealing with particular

policy issues at the sector or thematic level• Strategic evaluation– Evaluation of a particular high-risk issue where

timing is especially important• Process evaluation– Evaluation of projects dealing to assess the

efficiency and effectiveness of a process


Evaluation: Planning & Managing

• Formulating the TOR– TOR is a written document that defines the

issues that the evaluation should address and the products expected from the evaluation

• Role of Evaluation team– They should fulfill the TOR through

arrangements such as• Briefings on the progress of the evaluation• Indication of preliminary findings of the evaluation• Validation of preliminary findings with stakeholders• Formal debriefings


Evaluation: Planning & Managing• Country office will ensure that all

evaluations are– Carried out the appropriate time– Follow a methodology that ensures critical

issues will be objectively examined.– Produce the expected results


Evaluation Tools• An independent team will prepare

– Evaluation Report– PEIS (Project Evaluation and Information Sheet)

1. Evaluation Report– Assesses the fulfillment of TOR– Contents

• Findings: a factual statement based on empirical evidence• Conclusions: reasoned judgment based on findings• Recommendations• Lessons learned

2. Project Evaluation & Information Sheet (PEIS)– Basic information in ratings and textual assessment for

easy extraction


Evaluation Tools• Actions from Evaluation Report and PEIS– The designated institution

• implements recommendations on operational issues• may request a tripartite review regarding policy

issues– Stakeholders assess the implementation status

of the evaluation recommendations during APR– Evaluation Office reviews the substance and

quality of the evaluation report as a basis for providing feedback on lessons learned


Glossary

PAC Project Appraisal CommitteeLPAC Local PACPSD Private Sector DevelopmentUNDP United Nations Development ProgrammeMDG Millennium Development GoalsTOR Terms of Reference

Thank you