PARTICIPATORY SELF-EVALUATION REPORTS: GUIDELINES FOR PROJECT MANAGERS

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "PARTICIPATORY SELF-EVALUATION REPORTS: GUIDELINES FOR PROJECT MANAGERS"

Transcription

1 PARTICIPATORY SELF-EVALUATION REPORTS: GUIDELINES FOR PROJECT MANAGERS 1

2 Table of Contents Background A. Criteria B. Definition C. Rationale D. Initiator E. Timing F. Planning G. Involvement of the Independent Evaluation Unit Flowcharts for producing a participatory self-evaluation report Guidelines for producing participatory self-evaluation reports A. By obtaining written responses from stakeholders B. By conducting a workshop Annex: Template for producing a Participatory Self-Evaluation report I. Reasons for Participatory Self-Evaluation II. III. IV. Project information Introductory summary Assessment of project performance A. Design B. Relevance C. Efficiency D. Partnerships and cooperation E. Gender and Human Rights F. Effectivenness G. Sustainability V. Lessons learned VI. Self-Evaluation Follow-up Plan 2

3 I. Background A. Criteria Participatory Self-Evaluations are recommended when the criteria listed below apply: Projects that have started BEFORE June 2010 (actual starting date), with an overall budget below or equal to US$ 500,000, and for which no independent project evaluation is required. 1 Projects that have started AFTER June 2010 (actual starting date), with an overall budget below or equal to US$ 1,000,000, and for which no independent project evaluation is required. 2 Starting Overall Budget Type of Evaluation required before 30 June 2010 < USD 500,000 Participatory Self-Evaluation before 30 June 2010 = or > USD 500,000 Independent Project Evaluation after 30 June 2010 < USD 1,000,000 Participatory Self-Evaluation after 30 june 2010 = or > USD 1,000,000 Independent Project Evaluation For all projects, which have started before or after 30 June 2010, the present guidelines are applicable. B. Definition An evaluation conducted in a participatory manner by those who are entrusted with the design and delivery of a project and by those who are directly involved in or benefiting from the project. Based on the above definition, Participatory Self-Evaluations have to be conducted in a participatory manner. This means that stakeholders have to be closely involved in the process. Stakeholders involvement in Participatory Self-Evaluations can take the following two forms: Stakeholders written response to the Participatory Self-Evaluation report drafted by the Project Manager. Stakeholders state whether they are in agreement with the Participatory Self-Evaluation against the evaluation criteria (design, relevance, efficiency, partnerships, gender and human rights, effectiveness and sustainability). Workshops where stakeholders along with the project team discuss face to face the Participatory Self-Evaluation report drafted by the Project Manager and provide a common assessment against evaluation criteria. In this case, a minimum of USD 20,000 3 have to be allocated to budget line 5700 at the beginning of the project, in accordance with UNODC s evaluation guidelines. 1 Exceptions to this rule can be made, e.g. if an independent project evaluation is required by a Member State or a donor or if the project has a pilot character. Please consult with IEU in this regard. 2 See above footnote. 3 This amount is an indicative amount. As projects vary in size and scope, it is the Project Manager s responsibility to properly budget for and reserve sufficient funds for this exercise. Please see guidance in Part 3

4 C. Rationale The purpose of undertaking a Participatory Self-Evaluations is twofold: learning and accountability. Project Managers use Participatory Self-Evaluations as a tool to reflect in a structured way on why results were achieved or not and what can be done for improvement. Participatory Self-Evaluations have the following objectives: - To increase self-learning - To enhance transparency - To allow stakeholders present their assessments of UNODC s services - To enhance accountability - To build ownership and commitment to implementing recommendations D. Initiator The Project Manager 4 has to initiate the Participatory Self-Evaluation process in ProFi (IEU is automatically notified via ProFi). It should be noted that only the Project Manager (as indicated in ProFi) can initiate and carry out the process. E. Timing It is recommended that Participatory Self-Evaluation reports are submitted in ProFi by Project Managers close to the end of the project, based on the present evaluation guidelines and template. However, Project Managers and stakeholders can use the Participatory Self- Evaluation at their discretion and at any point in time of implementation to record good practices, lessons learned, unexpected results, or even operational difficulties and problems which may influence the project's future achievements. F. Planning Considering that Participatory Self-Evaluations have to be undertaken in a participatory manner through the provision of stakeholders responses or the organization of a workshop, the process needs to be planned for at least 2 to 3 months before the end of the project. Stakeholders should be consulted and informed of their role as early in the process as possible. The role of stakeholders is as follows: Read the draft Participatory Self-Evaluation report drafted by the Project Manager. Respond to the draft Participatory Self-Evaluation report by stating whether they are in agreement with the assessment of the project and with the recommendations, against evaluation criteria. This response could take the form of a written (stakeholders reponse modality) or an oral (workshop modality) response. G. Involvement of the Independent Evaluation Unit The Independent Evaluation Unit (IEU) is notified via ProFi of the undertaking of a Participatory Self-Evaluation, it ensures confidentiality in the process and it clears the final report. Participatory Self-Evaluations inform the IEU s Annual Evaluation Report. 4 The term Project Manager in the present guidelines and template corresponds to the term Project Coordinator as used in ProFi. 4

5 II. Flowcharts for producing a participatory self-evaluation report As mentioned above, stakeholders involvement in Participatory Self-Evaluations can take two forms among which the Project Manager has to choose. The process for each form of Participatory Self-Evaluation is decribed in the flowcharts below. FORM 1 FORM 2 5

6 III. Guidelines for producing participatory self-evaluation reports The Project Manager: A. By obtaining written responses from stakeholders Initiates the Participatory Self-Evaluation process via ProFi. While the ProFi system is upgraded to allow for such an automated workflow, Project Managers are encouraged to consult the IEU as regards the transition phase. Identifies representative(s) for each stakeholders groups 5. Informs representatives identified of the Participatory Self-Evaluation process and of their role (see above). 4. Fills in Step 1 boxes of the Participatory Self-Evaluation template located in Annex. To ensure confidentiality and anonymity, IEU sends the Participatory Self-Evaluation report drafted by the Project Manager to the stakeholders identified. The report is used by the stakeholders as a basis for producing their own assessment. Stakeholders fill in Step 2 boxes of the Participatory Self-Evaluation template located in Annex. Stakeholders indicated whether they (dis)agree with the Participatory Self-Evaluation produced by the Project Manager. IEU receives back the various responses from the stakeholders and post them on ProFi 6. The Project Manager: 5. Provides a brief introductory summary without altering stakeholders responses and a common Self-Evaluation Follow-up Plan (SEFP) by filling in Step 3 boxes of the Participatory Self-Evaluation template located in Annex. The summary and the SEFP should reflect the common assessment of management and stakeholders against the evaluation criteria. 6. Requests clearance from IEU. 7. Posts the final Participatory Self-Evaluation report on ProFi. 8. Monitors the progress of the Self-Evaluation Follow-up Plan (SEFP) and update it annually in ProFi (IEU to be notified automatically). 5 Stakeholders groups are those that can contribute to and would benefit from coordinating/drafting the stakeholders response to the self-evaluation report (e.g. UNODC staff, target groups, counterparts, donors, executing agencies, partner organizations, including other UN agencies involved, NGOs, research institutions, universities etc.). In Independent Project Evaluations, this group is also referred as Core Learning Partners. 6 To ensure confidentiality, stakeholders responses are anonymous (the information provided should not be traced back to stakeholders). 6

7 B. By conducting a workshop The Project Manager: Initiates the Participatory Self-Evaluation process via ProFi. While the ProFi system is upgraded to allow for such an automated workflow, Project Managers are encouraged to consult the IEU as regards the transition phase. Identifies representative(s) for each stakeholders groups 7. Informs representatives identified of the Participatory Self-Evaluation process and of their role (see above). 4. Fills in Step 1 boxes of the Participatory Self-Evaluation template located in Annex. 5. Organizes a Participatory Self-Evaluation workshop with the stakeholders representatives to discuss the Participatory Self-Evaluation report prepared by him/her (see Guidance on conducting a Participatory Self-Evaluation workshop below). 6. Following the workshop, revises the Participatory Self-Evaluation report, including the Self-Evaluation Follow-up Plan (SEFP) (see Step 3 boxes of the Participatory Self- Evaluation template located in Annex), to reflect management and stakeholders common understanding of the project s achievements against evaluation criteria. 7. Within one month following the workshop, requests IEU clearance and then posts the final Participatory Self-Evaluation report on ProFi. 8. Monitors the progress of Self-Evaluation Follow-up Plan (SEFP) and updates it annually in ProFi (IEU to be notified automatically). Guidance on conducting a Participatory Self-Evaluation workshop Purpose of the workshop The purpose of such a workshop is to collect stakeholders views and to jointly assess the performance of the project against evaluation criteria (design, relevance, efficiency, partnerships and coordination, gender and human rights, effectiveness and sustainability). The output of the workshop is the Participatory Self-Evaluation report reflecting management and stakeholders common understanding of the project s achievements against expected objectives contained in the project document. Planning The Participatory Self-Evaluation should be planned for at least three months in advance. The main steps of the process are the collection of the relevant data, the consultation with stakeholders, the drafting of the Participatory Self-Evaluation report and the organisation of the workshop. A participatory workshop requires a substantial time commitment, especially for the preparation phase, which involves consultation with stakeholders and identification of their representatives who will participate in the process. 7 Stakeholders groups are those that can contribute to and would benefit from coordinating/drafting the stakeholders response to the self-evaluation report (e.g. UNODC staff, target groups, counterparts, donors, executing agencies, partner organizations, including other UN agencies involved, NGOs, research institutions, universities etc.). 7

8 When planning a participatory workshop, it is vital that stakeholders are consulted early on and their role in the process discussed. Invitations, along with the Self-Evaluation report drafted by the Project Manager, should be issued at least a month in advance to ensure availability of participants and representation of stakeholders. Project Managers may be bound by stakeholders time availability. It is essential that participants have enough time to read the report drafted by the Project Manager before the workshop. Also, it is recommended to obtain initial feedback on the draft report before the formal workshop begins in order to ensure constructive discussions at the workshop. Budgeting It should be kept in mind that a minimum of USD 20,000 should be reserved for the organisation of the participatory workshop. The size of this event would vary according to the size of the project. However, the Organization would have to account for some typical items in the budgeting: venue; participants travel and DSA; materials/stationery; translation services; refreshments; any other logistics costs; facilitator s fee, if any. In case the budget is not available to gather all stakeholders in the same venue, opinions of stakeholders could still be heard by recording their views in small workshops in their respective countries or through phone interviews and questionnaires. Participants Getting the right mix of participants is crucial to the success of the Participatory Self- Evaluation. No more than 25 participants per workshop should be invited in order to allow for constructive discussions. Participants could be divided into smaller groups for discussions if deemed necessary. Facilitating The Project Manager should ensure that discussions are relevant, participatory and constructive, and that outputs (Participatory Self-Evaluation report and self-evaluation followup plan) are useful. 8

9 Annex: Template for producing a Participatory Self-Evaluation report STEP 1 - GUIDELINES The Project Manager should fill in the below template. Prepared by: d: REASONS FOR PARTICIPATORY SELF-EVALUATION Project started before June 2010 with budget below USD 500,000: Project started after June 2010 with budget below USD 1,000,000: Specification in project document: 4. Request from PRC: 5. Request from Executive Director: 6. Request from donor: 7. Request from Government: 8. Other: Specify: PROJECT INFORMATION Project title Project number Division/Branch Project owner Office Region/Country Planned project starting date from project approval Planned project completion date from project approval Planned duration from project approval Actual project starting date Overall budget Total approved budget Estimated total expenditures Donor/s Partners Beneficiaries Other comments from PROFI from PROFI from PROFI from PROFI from PROFI from PROFI from PROFI from PROFI from PROFI from PROFI from PROFI from PROFI Manual Entry would be required Manual Entry would be required Manual Entry would be required UNODC STAFF Position Current At approval Project Manager(s): 9

10 National Project Coordinator(s): Primary author of the Participatory Self- Evaluation report: Others: STAKEHOLDERS STEP 1 - GUIDELINES Identify one or two representative(s) for each stakeholders group that can contribute to, are willing to and would benefit from participating in the Participatory Self-Evaluation process. Ensure gender parity wherever possible. Please fill in the table below. Stakeholders Group UNODC staff Counterpart(s) Donor(s) Executing agencies Partner organisation(s), including UN agencies NGOs Any other relevant stakeholder First Name Last Name Title Address Telephone INTRODUCTION STEP 1 GUIDELINES FOR INTRODUCTION Brief description of the project at design stage and at the time of the Participatory Self-Evaluation: What are the significant changes/revisions during implementation if any (such as objectives; target groups; components; changes in implementation arrangements and schedules; or funding) and provide the rationale for these changes/revisions? Challenges and innovative solutions: What were the constraints encountered and the mitigation solutions applied? Were there any external factors (political, security, climatic, institutional etc.) that hampered the implementation of the project? Any other comment as regards overall assessment of the project. 4. ASSESSMENT OF PROJECT PERFORMANCE A. DESIGN STEP 1 - GUIDELINES Please answer the following questions: 1) How would you assess the design of the project? Please check the appropriate answer: Highly satisfactory Satisfactory 10

11 Moderately satisfactory Moderately unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Highly unsatisfactory 2) Were the logical framework s performance indicators specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time-bound given the outputs/outcomes? 3) Was the design based on a needs assessment and a context analysis? 4) Did the project design relate to the objectives, outcomes and/or outputs of a Country, Regional or Thematic Programme? 5) Are there any general lessons applicable to UNODC that could be drawn as regards design? STEP 1 GUIDELINES FOR SEFP - RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO DESIGN What recommendations would you draw from the findings related to design? Please fill in the below table by listing key recommendations with a designated recipient and responsible person within UNODC for follow-up. Recipient 8 Recommendation 9 Specific Action 10 Responsible person 11 Resource implications (Human, Financial, Technology, if any) Timing Start End B. RELEVANCE STEP 1 - GUIDELINES Relevance definition - The extent to which the objectives of a project are continuously consistent with recipients needs, UNODC mandate and overarching strategies and policies. Please answer the following questions: 1) How would you assess the relevance of the project Please check the appropriate answer: Highly satisfactory Satisfactory Moderately satisfactory Moderately unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Highly unsatisfactory 2) How relevant is the project to target groups, including Governments, needs and priorities? 3) How relevant is the project to other key stakeholders (executing agencies, partner organisations, including other UN agencies, NGOs etc.) needs and priorities? 8 The recipient is the institution (e.g. Government, Ministry, UNODC, other UN agency etc.) to whom the recommendation is addressed. 9 Recommendations are (i) derived from evidence, namely evaluation conclusions, (ii) useful, realistic and implementable, and (iii) guide future work. Please propose concrete and usable recommendations. 10 Specific actions are specific actions collectively identified and agreed upon among the Project Manager and team to implement the recommendations. 11 Each follow-up action must have an associated responsible person within UNODC to ensure implementation and ownership of the Participatory Self-Evaluation. 11

12 4) How relevant is the project to UNODC s strategy in the country and in the region based on relevant Country, Regional and Thematic Programmes? 5) Is the project in line with overarching strategies and objectives, e.g. UNDAF, MDGs etc.? Which specific areas does it contribute to? 6) Are there any general lessons applicable to UNODC that could be drawn as regards relevance? STEP 1 GUIDELINES FOR SEFP - RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO RELEVANCE What recommendations would you draw from the findings related to relevance? Please fill in the below table by listing key recommendations with a designated recipient and responsible person within UNODC for follow-up. Recipient Recommendation Specific Action Responsible person Resource implications (Human, Financial, Technology, if any) Timing Start End C. EFFICIENCY STEP 1 - GUIDELINES Efficiency definition 12 - A measure of how resources/inputs (funds, expertise, time, etc.) are converted into outputs. Please answer the following questions: 1) How would you assess the efficiency of the project? Please check the appropriate answer: Highly satisfactory Satisfactory Moderately satisfactory Moderately unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Highly unsatisfactory 2) Were the resources and inputs converted to outputs in a timely and cost-effective manner? 3) Was UNODC HQ based management, coordination and monitoring efficient and appropriate for Field Offices? 4) Were UNODC HQ administrative and financial processes adequate to manage the project? 5) Are there any general lessons applicable to UNODC that could be drawn as regards achievement of outputs? STEP 1 GUIDELINES FOR SEFP - RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO EFFICIENCY What recommendations would you draw from the findings related to efficiency? Please fill in the below table by listing key recommendations with a designated recipient and responsible person within UNODC for follow-up. Recipient Recommendation Specific Action Responsible person Resource implications (Human, Financial, Technology, if any) Timing Start End 12 Source: OECD- Development Assistance Committee: Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results Based Management,

13 13

14 D. PARTNERSHIPS AND COOPERATION STEP 1 - GUIDELINES Partnerships and cooperation definition Measure of the level and quality of UNODC s cooperation with partners and implementing partners (e.g. donors, NGOs, Governments, other UN agencies etc.) Please answer the following questions: 1) How would you assess the partnerships and cooperation of the project? Please check the appropriate answer: Highly satisfactory Satisfactory Moderately satisfactory Moderately unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Highly unsatisfactory 2) To what extent have partnerships been sought and established (including UN agencies) and synergies been created in the delivery of assistance? 3) Were efficient cooperation arrangements established: - Between UNODC and Governments? - Between UNODC and donors? - Between UNODC and executing agencies? - Between UNODC and other UN agencies? - Between UNODC and other partners? 4) Were partners (e.g. donors, NGOs, Governments, other UN agencies etc.) inputs of quality and provided in a timely manner? Have partners fully and effectively discharged their responsibilities? 5) Does your project contribute to the One UN, UNDAF, and other UN system-wide coordination mechanisms (participation in UN Country Team)? If yes, how does UNODC s participation in UN activities influence achievement of UNODC s project objectives, outcomes and outputs? 6) Are there any general lessons applicable to UNODC that could be drawn as regards partnerships, e.g. what are the reasons for successful partnerships? STEP 1 GUIDELINES FOR SEFP - RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO PARTNERSHIPS What recommendations would you draw from the findings related to partnerships? Please fill in the below table by listing key recommendations with a designated recipient and responsible person within UNODC for follow-up. Recipient Recommendation Specific Action Responsible person Resource implications (Human, Financial, Technology, if any) Timing Start End 14

15 E. GENDER AND HUMAN RIGHTS STEP 1 - GUIDELINES Please answer the following questions: 1) Are there any general lessons applicable to UNODC that could be drawn as regards gender, in particular: - At the design stage of a project - During implementation - During the monitoring process 2) Are there any general lessons applicable to UNODC that could be drawn as regards human rights, in particular: - At the design stage of a project - During implementation - During the monitoring process 3) If applicable, to what extent did the project s achievements contribute to the improvement of gender equality? 4) If applicable, to what extent did the project s achievements contribute to the improvement of human rights? STEP 1 GUIDELINES FOR SEFP - RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO GENDER AND HUMAN RIGHTS What recommendations would you draw from the findings related to gender and human rights? Please fill in the below table by listing key recommendations with a designated recipient and responsible person within UNODC for follow-up. Recipient Recommendation Specific Action Responsible person Resource implications (Human, Financial, Technology, if any) Timing Start End F. EFFECTIVENESS STEP 1 - GUIDELINES Effectiveness definition - The extent to which the project s objectives and outcomes were achieved. Please answer the following questions: 1) How would you assess the effectiveness of the project? Please check the appropriate answer: Highly satisfactory Moderately satisfactory Moderately unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Highly unsatisfactory 2) Please state planned objectives and outcomes in the logframe of the project document. Were the planned objectives and outcomes achieved? Please provide a brief analysis on the project progress in achieving the objectives and outcomes. Please also, describe the problems encountered to deliver the planned objectives and outcomes. 3) What are the results achieved beyond the logframe? 4) Please explain reasons for variance between planned objectives and outcomes in the logframe, and actual achieved objectives and outcomes. 15

16 5) To what extent did the project s achievements contribute to relevant Country, Regional and Thematic Programmes? 6) Are there any general lessons applicable to UNODC that could be drawn as regards achievement of objectives and outcomes? STEP 1 GUIDELINES FOR SEFP - RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO EFFECTIVENESS What recommendations would you draw from the findings related to effectiveness? Please fill in the below table by listing key recommendations with a designated recipient and responsible person within UNODC for follow-up. Recipient Recommendation Specific Action Responsible person Resource implications (Human, Financial, Technology, if any) Timing Start End G. SUSTAINABILITY STEP 1 - GUIDELINES Sustainability definition - Sustainability is concerned with measuring whether the benefits of a project are likely to continue after its termination. Projects need to be environmentally as well as financially sustainable. Please answer the below questions: 1) How would you assess the sustainability of the project? Please check the appropriate answer: Highly satisfactory Satisfactory Moderately satisfactory Moderately unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Highly unsatisfactory 2) To what extent are the project results likely to continue after the project? 3) Is stakeholders engagement likely to continue, be scaled up, replicated or institutionalized after external funding ceases? STEP 1 GUIDELINES FOR SEFP - RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO SUSTAINABILITY What recommendations would you draw from the findings related to sustainability? Please fill in the below table by listing key recommendations with a designated recipient and responsible person within UNODC for follow-up. Recipient Recommendation Specific Action Responsible person Resource implications (Human, Financial, Technology, if any) Timing Start End 16

17 5. LESSONS LEARNED STEP 1 - GUIDELINES Lessons learned definition 13 - Generalizations based on evaluation experiences with projects, programmes, or policies that abstract from the specific circumstances to broader situations. Frequently, lessons highlight strengths or weaknesses in preparation, design, and implementation that affect performance and outcomes. Please identify lessons learned for those factors that enable success, as well as and lessons learned for those factors that impede performance. 13 Source: OECD- Development Assistance Committee: Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results Based Management,

18 STEP 2 - GUIDELINES Stakeholders should fill in the below template. 4. ASSESSMENT OF PROJECT PERFORMANCE A. DESIGN STEP 2 STAKEHOLDERS RESPONSE - ASSESSMENT OF DESIGN Please use the below Response Table to react to the assessment produced by the Project Manager. Clearly state in the table whether there is agreement or not with each Participatory Self-Evaluation points produced by the Project Manager (see first column) along with an explanation (see second column). Please note that to ensure confidentiality, your response is anonymous. The information provided can t be traced Response against evaluation criteria for design 1) How would you assess the design of the project? Please check the appropriate answer: Highly satisfactory Satisfactory Moderately satisfactory Moderately unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Highly unsatisfactory Stakeholders Response: (Indicate whether you accept/ partially accept/ don t accept the assessment provided by the Project Manager) 2) 3) 4) 5) Comments: (Please provide an explanation along with your own assessment) STEP 2 STAKEHOLDERS RESPONSE - RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO DESIGN Please use the below Response Table to provide your response to the recommendations produced by the Project Manager. Clearly state in the table whether there is agreement or not with each recommendation produced by the Project Manager (see first column). If the recommendation is partially accepted or not accepted please provide an explanation along with your suggested recommendation (see second column). Please note that to ensure confidentiality, your response is anonymous. The information provided can t be traced Response against recommendation(s) related to design Stakeholders Response: Comments: Rec. (Indicate whether you accept/ partially accept/ don t (If the recommendation is partially accepted # accept the recommendation provided by the Project or not accepted please provide an explanation Manager) along with your suggested recommendation) 18

19 B. RELEVANCE STEP 2 STAKEHOLDERS RESPONSE - ASSESSMENT OF RELEVANCE Please use the below Response Table to react to the assessment produced by the Project Manager. Clearly state in the table whether there is agreement or not with each Participatory Self-Evaluation points produced by the Project Manager (see first column) along with an explanation (see second column). Please note that to ensure confidentiality, your response is anonymous. The information provided can t be traced Response against evaluation criteria for relevance 1) How would you assess the relevance of the project? Please check the appropriate answer: Highly satisfactory Satisfactory Moderately satisfactory Moderately unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Highly unsatisfactory Stakeholders Response: (Indicate whether you accept/ partially accept/ don t accept the assessment provided by the Project Manager) Comments: (Please provide an explanation along with your own assessment) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) STEP 2 STAKEHOLDERS RESPONSE - RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO RELEVANCE Please use the below Response Table to provide your response to the recommendations produced by the Project Manager. Clearly state in the table whether there is agreement or not with each recommendation produced by the Project Manager (see first column). If the recommendation is partially accepted or not accepted please provide an explanation along with your suggested recommendation (see second column). Please note that to ensure confidentiality, your response is anonymous. The information provided can t be traced Response against recommendation(s) related to relevance Rec. # Stakeholders Response: (Indicate whether you accept/ partially accept/ don t accept the recommendation provided by the Project Manager) Comments: (If the recommendation is partially accepted or not accepted please provide an explanation along with your suggested recommendation) C. EFFICIENCY STEP 2 STAKEHOLDERS RESPONSE - ASSESSMENT OF EFFICIENCY Please use the below Response Table to react to the assessment produced by the Project Manager. Clearly state in the table whether there is agreement or not with each Participatory Self-Evaluation points produced by the Project Manager (see first column) along with an explanation (see second column). Please note that to ensure confidentiality, your response is anonymous. The information provided can t be traced 19

20 Response against evaluation criteria for efficiency 1) How would you assess the efficiency of the project? Please check the appropriate answer: Highly satisfactory Satisfactory Moderately satisfactory Moderately unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Highly unsatisfactory Stakeholders Response: (Indicate whether you accept/ partially accept/ don t accept the assessment provided by the Project Manager) 2) 3) 4) 5) Comments: (Please provide an explanation along with your own assessment) STEP 2 STAKEHOLDERS RESPONSE - RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO EFFICIENCY Please use the below Response Table to provide your response to the recommendations produced by the Project Manager. Clearly state in the table whether there is agreement or not with each recommendation produced by the Project Manager (see first column). If the recommendation is partially accepted or not accepted please provide an explanation along with your suggested recommendation (see second column). Please note that to ensure confidentiality, your response is anonymous. The information provided can t be traced Response against recommendation(s) related to efficiency Rec. # Stakeholders Response: (Indicate whether you accept/ partially accept/ don t accept the recommendation provided by the Project Manager) D. PARTNERSHIPS AND COOPERATION Comments: (If the recommendation is partially accepted or not accepted please provide an explanation along with your suggested recommendation) STEP 2 STAKEHOLDERS RESPONSE - ASSESSMENT OF PARTNERSHIPS AND COOPERATION Please use the below Response Table to react to the assessment produced by the Project Manager. Clearly state in the table whether there is agreement or not with each Participatory Self-Evaluation points produced by the Project Manager (see first column) along with an explanation (see second column). Please note that to ensure confidentiality, your response is anonymous. The information provided can t be traced 20

21 Response against evaluation criteria for partnerships and cooperation 1) How would you assess the partnerships and cooperation of the project? Please check the appropriate answer: Highly satisfactory Satisfactory Moderately satisfactory Moderately unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Highly unsatisfactory Stakeholders Response: (Indicate whether you accept/ partially accept/ don t accept the assessment provided by the Project Manager) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) Comments: (Please provide an explanation along with your own assessment) STEP 2 STAKEHOLDERS RESPONSE - RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO PARTNERSHIPS Please use the below Response Table to provide your response to the recommendations produced by the Project Manager. Clearly state in the table whether there is agreement or not with each recommendation produced by the Project Manager (see first column). If the recommendation is partially accepted or not accepted please provide an explanation along with your suggested recommendation (see second column). Please note that to ensure confidentiality, your response is anonymous. The information provided can t be traced Response against recommendation(s) related to partnerships Rec. # Stakeholders Response: (Indicate whether you accept/ partially accept/ don t accept the recommendation provided by the Project Manager) E. GENDER AND HUMAN RIGHTS Comments: (If the recommendation is partially accepted or not accepted please provide an explanation along with your suggested recommendation) STEP 2 STAKEHOLDERS RESPONSE - ASSESSMENT OF GENDER AND HUMAN RIGHTS Please use the below Response Table to react to the assessment produced by the Project Manager. Clearly state in the table whether there is agreement or not with each Participatory Self-Evaluation points produced by the Project Manager (see first column) along with an explanation (see second column). Please note that to ensure confidentiality, your response is anonymous. The information provided can t be traced Response against evaluation criteria for gender and human rights Stakeholders Response: Comments: (Indicate whether you accept/ partially accept/ don t (Please provide an explanation along with accept the assessment provided by the Project your own assessment) Manager) 1) 21

22 2) STEP 2 STAKEHOLDERS RESPONSE - RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO GENDER AND HUMAN RIGHTS Please use the below Response Table to provide your response to the recommendations produced by the Project Manager. Clearly state in the table whether there is agreement or not with each recommendation produced by the Project Manager (see first column). If the recommendation is partially accepted or not accepted please provide an explanation along with your suggested recommendation (see second column). Please note that to ensure confidentiality, your response is anonymous. The information provided can t be traced Response against recommendation(s) related to gender and human rights Rec. # Stakeholders Response: (Indicate whether you accept/ partially accept/ don t accept the recommendation provided by the Project Manager) F. EFFECTIVENESS STEP 2 STAKEHOLDERS RESPONSE - ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTIVENESS Comments: (If the recommendation is partially accepted or not accepted please provide an explanation along with your suggested recommendation) Please use the below Response Table to react to the assessment produced by the Project Manager. Clearly state in the table whether there is agreement or not with each Participatory Self-Evaluation points produced by the Project Manager (see first column) along with an explanation (see second column). Please note that to ensure confidentiality, your response is anonymous. The information provided can t be traced Response against evaluation criteria for effectiveness 1) How would you assess the partnerships and cooperation of the project? Please check the appropriate answer: Highly satisfactory Satisfactory Moderately satisfactory Moderately unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Highly unsatisfactory Stakeholders Response: (Indicate whether you accept/ partially accept/ don t accept the assessment provided by the Project Manager) 2) 3) 4) Comments: (Please provide an explanation along with your own assessment) STEP 2 STAKEHOLDERS RESPONSE - RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO EFFECTIVENESS Please use the below Response Table to provide your response to the recommendations produced by the Project Manager. Clearly state in the table whether there is agreement or not with each recommendation produced by the Project Manager (see first column). If the recommendation is partially accepted or not accepted please provide an explanation along with your suggested recommendation (see second column). 22

23 Please note that to ensure confidentiality, your response is anonymous. The information provided can t be traced Response against recommendation(s) related to effectiveness Rec. # Stakeholders Response: (Indicate whether you accept/ partially accept/ don t accept the recommendation provided by the Project Manager) G. SUSTAINABILITY STEP 2 STAKEHOLDERS RESPONSE - ASSESSMENT OF SUSTAINABILITY Comments: (If the recommendation is partially accepted or not accepted please provide an explanation along with your suggested recommendation) Please use the below Response Table to react to the assessment produced by the Project Manager. Clearly state in the table whether there is agreement or not with each Participatory Self-Evaluation points produced by the Project Manager (see first column) along with an explanation (see second column). Please note that to ensure confidentiality, your response is anonymous. The information provided can t be traced Response against evaluation criteria for sustainability 1) How would you assess the sustainability of the project? Please check the appropriate answer: Highly satisfactory Satisfactory Moderately satisfactory Moderately unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Highly unsatisfactory Stakeholders Response: (Indicate whether you accept/ partially accept/ don t accept the assessment provided by the Project Manager) 2) 3) Comments: (Please provide an explanation along with your own assessment) STEP 2 STAKEHOLDERS RESPONSE - RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO SUSTAINABILITY Please use the below Response Table to provide your response to the recommendations produced by the Project Manager. Clearly state in the table whether there is agreement or not with each recommendation produced by the Project Manager (see first column). If the recommendation is partially accepted or not accepted please provide an explanation along with your suggested recommendation (see second column). Please note that to ensure confidentiality, your response is anonymous. The information provided can t be traced Response against recommendation(s) related to sustainability Rec. # Stakeholders Response: (Indicate whether you accept/ partially accept/ don t accept the recommendation provided by the Comments: (If the recommendation is partially accepted or not accepted please provide 23

24 Project Manager) an explanation along with your suggested recommendation) 5. LESSONS LEARNED STEP 2 STAKEHOLDERS RESPONSE - LESSONS LEARNED Please add any lesson that you believe is of importance. Please note that to ensure confidentiality, your response is anonymous. The information provided can t be traced 24

25 STEP 3 - GUIDELINES The Project Manager should fill in the below template. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY STEP 3 - GUIDELINES FOR EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Synthesize stakeholders responses, without altering them. The executive summary should reflect the common assessment of management and stakeholders against evaluation criteria (design, relevance, efficiency, partnerships and cooperation, gender and human rights, effectiveness and sustainability). Please capture achievements and innovative solutions beyond the logframe. 4. SELF-EVALUATION FOLLOW-UP PLAN A. DESIGN STEP 3 - GUIDELINES FOR SELF-EVALUATION FOLLOW-UP PLAN (SEFP) Using the below Table, please finalize the SEFP by keeping only recommendations accepted or partially accepted by stakeholders. The final SEFP should reflect the common assessment of management and stakeholders against evaluation criteria. The final SEFP has to be transmitted to the IEU. The Project Manager is responsible for following-up on the implementation of the specific actions addressing the recommendations. S/he can use the below table as a reminder to ensure that all partners implement what they have committed to. It is the responsibility of Project Managers to monitor progress of the SEFP and to update it annually (see last column). Recipient Recommendation Specific Action Responsible person Resource implications (Human, Financial, Technology, if any) Timing Start End Status after a year B. RELEVANCE STEP 3 - GUIDELINES FOR SELF-EVALUATION FOLLOW-UP PLAN (SEFP) Using the below Table, please finalize the SEFP by keeping only recommendations accepted or partially accepted by stakeholders. The final SEFP should reflect the common assessment of management and stakeholders against evaluation criteria. The final SEFP has to be transmitted to the IEU. The Project Manager is responsible for following-up on the implementation of the specific actions addressing the recommendations. S/he can use the below table as a reminder to ensure that all partners implement what they have committed to. It is the responsibility of Project Managers to monitor progress of the SEFP and to update it annually (see last column). 25

26 Recipient Recommendation Specific Action Responsible person Resource implications (Human, Financial, Technology, if any) Timing Start End Status after a year C. EFFICIENCY STEP 3 - GUIDELINES FOR SELF-EVALUATION FOLLOW-UP PLAN (SEFP) Using the below Table, please finalize the SEFP by keeping only recommendations accepted or partially accepted by stakeholders. The final SEFP should reflect the common assessment of management and stakeholders against evaluation criteria. The final SEFP has to be transmitted to the IEU. The Project Manager is responsible for following-up on the implementation of the specific actions addressing the recommendations. S/he can use the below table as a reminder to ensure that all partners implement what they have committed to. It is the responsibility of Project Managers to monitor progress of the SEFP and to update it annually (see last column). Recipient Recommendation Specific Action Responsible person Resource implications (Human, Financial, Technology, if any) Timing Start End Status after a year D. PARTNERSHIPS AND COOPERATION STEP 3 - GUIDELINES FOR SELF-EVALUATION FOLLOW-UP PLAN (SEFP) Using the below Table, please finalize the SEFP by keeping only recommendations accepted or partially accepted by stakeholders. The final SEFP should reflect the common assessment of management and stakeholders against evaluation criteria. The final SEFP has to be transmitted to the IEU. The Project Manager is responsible for following-up on the implementation of the specific actions addressing the recommendations. S/he can use the below table as a reminder to ensure that all partners implement what they have committed to. It is the responsibility of Project Managers to monitor progress of the SEFP and to update it annually (see last column). Recipient Recommendation Specific Action Responsible person Resource implications (Human, Financial, Technology, if any) Timing Start End Status after a year E. GENDER AND HUMAN RIGHTS STEP 3 - GUIDELINES FOR SELF-EVALUATION FOLLOW-UP PLAN (SEFP) 26

27 Using the below Table, please finalize the SEFP by keeping only recommendations accepted or partially accepted by stakeholders. The final SEFP should reflect the common assessment of management and stakeholders against evaluation criteria. The final SEFP has to be transmitted to the IEU. The Project Manager is responsible for following-up on the implementation of the specific actions addressing the recommendations. S/he can use the below table as a reminder to ensure that all partners implement what they have committed to. It is the responsibility of Project Managers to monitor progress of the SEFP and to update it annually (see last column). Recipient Recommendation Specific Action Responsible person Resource implications (Human, Financial, Technology, if any) Timing Start End Status after a year F. EFFECTIVENESS STEP 3 - GUIDELINES FOR SELF-EVALUATION FOLLOW-UP PLAN (SEFP) Using the below Table, please finalize the SEFP by keeping only recommendations accepted or partially accepted by stakeholders. The final SEFP should reflect the common assessment of management and stakeholders against evaluation criteria. The final SEFP has to be transmitted to the IEU. The Project Manager is responsible for following-up on the implementation of the specific actions addressing the recommendations. S/he can use the below table as a reminder to ensure that all partners implement what they have committed to. It is the responsibility of Project Managers to monitor progress of the SEFP and to update it annually (see last column). Recipient Recommendation Specific Action Responsible person Resource implications (Human, Financial, Technology, if any) Timing Start End Status after a year G. SUSTAINABILITY STEP 3 - GUIDELINES FOR SELF-EVALUATION FOLLOW-UP PLAN (SEFP) Using the below Table, please finalize the SEFP by keeping only recommendations accepted or partially accepted by stakeholders. The final SEFP should reflect the common assessment of management and stakeholders against evaluation criteria. The final SEFP has to be transmitted to the IEU. The Project Manager is responsible for following-up on the implementation of the specific actions addressing the recommendations. S/he can use the below table as a reminder to ensure that all partners implement what they have committed to. It is the responsibility of Project Managers to monitor progress of the SEFP and to update it annually (see last column). 27

28 Recipient Recommendation Specific Action Responsible person Resource implications (Human, Financial, Technology, if any) Timing Start End Status after a year 28

Guidelines for UNODC Evaluation Reports 1

Guidelines for UNODC Evaluation Reports 1 Guidelines for UNODC Evaluation Reports 1 CONTENTS A standard evaluation report starts with a cover page, a table of contents, a list of abbreviations and acronyms, an executive summary and a matrix of

More information

UNODC Independent Evaluation Unit Evaluation Quality Assessment Template

UNODC Independent Evaluation Unit Evaluation Quality Assessment Template UNODC Independent Evaluation Unit Evaluation Quality Assessment Template General Project Information Project/Programme Number and Name Thematic Area Geographic Area (Region, Country) Type of Evaluation

More information

Guidelines for Evaluation Terms of Reference

Guidelines for Evaluation Terms of Reference Guidelines for Evaluation Terms of Reference 1. The present Guidelines for Evaluation Terms of Reference (TOR) form part of a common set of ITC Evaluation Guidelines that operationalize the ITC Evaluation

More information

Guidance Note on Developing Terms of Reference (ToR) for Evaluations

Guidance Note on Developing Terms of Reference (ToR) for Evaluations Evaluation Guidance Note Series UNIFEM Evaluation Unit October 2009 Guidance Note on Developing Terms of Reference (ToR) for Evaluations Terms of Reference (ToR) What? Why? And How? These guidelines aim

More information

GLOSSARY OF KEY TERMS IN M&E

GLOSSARY OF KEY TERMS IN M&E ANNEX E: GLOSSARY OF KEY TERMS IN M&E Source: Development Assistance Committee (DAC). 2002. Glossary of Terms in Evaluation and Results-Based Management. Paris: OECD. This glossary is available in English,

More information

FOREIGN AFFAIRS PROGRAM EVALUATION GLOSSARY CORE TERMS

FOREIGN AFFAIRS PROGRAM EVALUATION GLOSSARY CORE TERMS Activity: A specific action or process undertaken over a specific period of time by an organization to convert resources to products or services to achieve results. Related term: Project. Appraisal: An

More information

MONITORING GOVERNANCE SAFEGUARDS IN REDD+ CHATHAM HOUSE & UN-REDD PROGRAMME WORKSHOP 1

MONITORING GOVERNANCE SAFEGUARDS IN REDD+ CHATHAM HOUSE & UN-REDD PROGRAMME WORKSHOP 1 MONITORING GOVERNANCE SAFEGUARDS IN REDD+ CHATHAM HOUSE & UN-REDD PROGRAMME WORKSHOP 1 Meeting Report 24 25 May 2010 The need for monitoring REDD+ governance How does one ensure that REDD+ mitigation actions

More information

PROJECT MANAGEMENT TRAINING MODULES

PROJECT MANAGEMENT TRAINING MODULES PROJECT MANAGEMENT TRAINING MODULES KENYA PROJECTS ORGANIZATION < Projects Solutions Provider > Macjo Arcade, 4 th Flr., Suite 15E P.O Box, 3029 00200, Nairobi - Kenya Tel: 254 (0)202319748 Mob: 0725 788

More information

Evaluability Assessment Template

Evaluability Assessment Template Evaluability Assessment Template Evaluability Assessment Template An Evaluability Assessment examines the extent to which a project or a programme can be evaluated in a reliable and credible fashion. An

More information

GLOSSARY OF EVALUATION TERMS

GLOSSARY OF EVALUATION TERMS Planning and Performance Management Unit Office of the Director of U.S. Foreign Assistance Final Version: March 25, 2009 INTRODUCTION This Glossary of Evaluation and Related Terms was jointly prepared

More information

UNDP Programming Manual December 2000. Chapter 7: MONITORING, REPORTING AND EVALUATION Page 1

UNDP Programming Manual December 2000. Chapter 7: MONITORING, REPORTING AND EVALUATION Page 1 Chapter 7: MONITORING, REPORTING AND EVALUATION Page 1 Contents Page 7.0 MONITORING, REPORTING AND EVALUATION See the New M & E Framework. 7.1 Policy framework 7.1.1 General policy statements 7.1.2 Coverage

More information

Independent Mid-term project evaluation of the

Independent Mid-term project evaluation of the UNITED NATIONS OFFICE ON DRUGS AND CRIME Regional Office for Southern Africa Independent Mid-term project evaluation of the Capacity building for Member States of the Southern African Development Community

More information

ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPMENT RESULTS

ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPMENT RESULTS ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPMENT RESULTS UNDP Evaluation Office, January 2007 GUIDELINES FOR AN ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPMENT RESULTS (ADR) CONTENTS A. WHAT IS THE ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPMENT RESULTS (ADR)? An introduction

More information

VII. Monitoring and reporting

VII. Monitoring and reporting VII. Monitoring and ing Project monitoring and ing are essential com ponents of project management. The project coordinator and the project coordinator s supervisor are the principal beneficiaries of the

More information

Module 4: Monitoring and Reporting 4-1

Module 4: Monitoring and Reporting 4-1 Module 4: Monitoring and Reporting 4-1 Module 4: Monitoring and Reporting 4-2 Module 4: Monitoring and Reporting TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. MONITORING... 3 1.1. WHY MONITOR?... 3 1.2. OPERATIONAL MONITORING...

More information

Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan

Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan Cap-Net International Network for Capacity Building in Sustainable Water Management November 2009 The purpose of this document is to improve learning from the Cap-Net

More information

REQUIRED DOCUMENTS FROM HIRING UNIT 8 - CONFIRMATION OF CATEGORY OF LOCAL CONSULTANT, please select : Senior (1) Junior Consultant

REQUIRED DOCUMENTS FROM HIRING UNIT 8 - CONFIRMATION OF CATEGORY OF LOCAL CONSULTANT, please select : Senior (1) Junior Consultant Terms of reference GENERAL INFORMATION Title: Mid-Term Review Lead Consultant for Climate Change Adaptation - SPARC Project (International) Re Advertisement Project Name: Strategic Planning and Actions

More information

DECISION B.11/06 * Agenda item 32: Other matters 11/5/2015 11:17 PM. The Board:

DECISION B.11/06 * Agenda item 32: Other matters 11/5/2015 11:17 PM. The Board: Page.1 DECISION B.11/06 * Agenda item 32: Other matters The Board: (f) (g) (h) (j) Decides on the need to undertake and conclude a review of the performance of the Executive Director by the first meeting

More information

Identification. Preparation and formulation. Evaluation. Review and approval. Implementation. A. Phase 1: Project identification

Identification. Preparation and formulation. Evaluation. Review and approval. Implementation. A. Phase 1: Project identification II. Figure 5: 6 The project cycle can be explained in terms of five phases: identification, preparation and formulation, review and approval, implementation, and evaluation. Distinctions among these phases,

More information

ILO/EC Project. Monitoring and Assessing Progress on Decent Work (MAP) Logical Framework Matrix at Global and Regional Level

ILO/EC Project. Monitoring and Assessing Progress on Decent Work (MAP) Logical Framework Matrix at Global and Regional Level ILO/EC Project Monitoring and Assessing Progress on Decent Work (MAP) Logical Framework Matrix at Global and Regional Level I. Objectives at global level Overall Objective (OO): to contribute to the realisation

More information

PRINCIPLES FOR EVALUATION OF DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE

PRINCIPLES FOR EVALUATION OF DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE PRINCIPLES FOR EVALUATION OF DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE PARIS 1991 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION 3 II. PURPOSE OF EVALUATION 5 III. IMPARTIALITY AND INDEPENDENCE 6 IV.

More information

Manual. May 2005 Version 3.1 (English)

Manual. May 2005 Version 3.1 (English) RESULTS BASED BUDGETING Manual May 2005 Version 3.1 (English) TABLE OF CONTENTS RESULTS BASED BUDGETING: INTRODUCTION...4 PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF RESULTS BASED BUDGETING...6 TRAINING MANUAL...7 THE BUDGET

More information

STRATEGIC REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN UNICEF. Terms of Reference July 20 2005

STRATEGIC REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN UNICEF. Terms of Reference July 20 2005 1. Background STRATEGIC REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN UNICEF Terms of Reference July 20 2005 UNICEF has decided to undertake a Strategic Review of its approach to and performance in Human Resource

More information

TOR. Developing Database System for the NGOs Directorate. National Consultant. 180 days (over a period of 6 months)

TOR. Developing Database System for the NGOs Directorate. National Consultant. 180 days (over a period of 6 months) TOR Developing Database System for the NGOs Directorate National Consultant Period of assignment/services: Duty Station: 180 days (over a period of 6 months) Baghdad Estimated Starting Date: 1 May Contract

More information

Using the logical framework matrix

Using the logical framework matrix Using the logical framework matrix Defining the M&E Strategy for a programme/project A logical framework Clearly defined results and risks Performance indicators and means of verification An M&E plan for

More information

Draft Discussion Paper

Draft Discussion Paper Second Meeting of the Open-ended Tripartite Working Group on the Follow-up to the Review of the Cooperation of UNESCO s Secretariat with National Commissions for UNESCO 21-22 February 2013, Room XII, UNESCO

More information

DG ENLARGEMENT SECTOR BUDGET SUPPORT GUIDELINES

DG ENLARGEMENT SECTOR BUDGET SUPPORT GUIDELINES Ref. Ares(2014)571140-04/03/2014 DG ENLARGEMENT SECTOR BUDGET SUPPORT GUIDELINES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY January 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1. RATIONALE FOR BUDGET SUPPORT 1.1 What is Budget Support?

More information

Equal Rights and Treatment for Roma in Moldova and Ukraine. Manual

Equal Rights and Treatment for Roma in Moldova and Ukraine. Manual Equal Rights and Treatment for Roma in Moldova and Ukraine Project Management Methodology Manual WELCOME TO THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE PROJECT MANAGEMENT METHODOLOGY In July 2001, the Council of Europe launched

More information

Vacancy Announcement VA16P034V02 Project Manager/Team Leader Support to Free Movement of Persons and Migration in West Africa (FMM West Africa)

Vacancy Announcement VA16P034V02 Project Manager/Team Leader Support to Free Movement of Persons and Migration in West Africa (FMM West Africa) Vacancy Announcement VA16P034V02 Project Manager/Team Leader Support to Free Movement of Persons and Migration in West Africa (FMM West Africa) Duty station: Abuja, Nigeria (with regular travel) Start

More information

III. e-forum discussion

III. e-forum discussion Report (including the Draft Action Plan) of the Open-ended Tripartite Working Group on the Follow-up to the Review of the Cooperation of UNESCO s Secretariat with National Commissions for UNESCO I. Background

More information

DAC Guidelines and Reference Series. Quality Standards for Development Evaluation

DAC Guidelines and Reference Series. Quality Standards for Development Evaluation DAC Guidelines and Reference Series Quality Standards for Development Evaluation DAC Guidelines and Reference Series Quality Standards for Development Evaluation DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE ORGANISATION

More information

Development Account GUIDANCE FOR PREPARING 10 TH TRANCHE BUDGETS FOR UMOJA

Development Account GUIDANCE FOR PREPARING 10 TH TRANCHE BUDGETS FOR UMOJA GUIDANCE FOR PREPARING 10 TH TRANCHE BUDGETS FOR UMOJA This guide intends to replace the budget template for 10 th tranche projects previously distributed. Given the launching of UMOJA a few changes have

More information

Regulation on the implementation of the European Economic Area (EEA) Financial Mechanism 2009-2014

Regulation on the implementation of the European Economic Area (EEA) Financial Mechanism 2009-2014 the European Economic Area (EEA) Financial Mechanism 2009-2014 adopted by the EEA Financial Mechanism Committee pursuant to Article 8.8 of Protocol 38b to the EEA Agreement on 13 January 2011 and confirmed

More information

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT STRATEGY MEETING 7 April 2002 0900-1300 UNAMA Conference Room Chaired by Nigel Fisher (UNAMA) and Ashraf Ghani (AACA)

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT STRATEGY MEETING 7 April 2002 0900-1300 UNAMA Conference Room Chaired by Nigel Fisher (UNAMA) and Ashraf Ghani (AACA) 0900-1300 UNAMA Conference Room Chaired by Nigel Fisher (UNAMA) and Ashraf Ghani (AACA) Agenda 0845 Refreshments 0900 Introduction (Ashraf Ghani) 0915 Presentation on overall information strategy, including

More information

Share. Tweet. Applications to vacancies must be received before midnight Copenhagen time (CET) on the closing date of the announcement.

Share. Tweet. Applications to vacancies must be received before midnight Copenhagen time (CET) on the closing date of the announcement. Tweet Share DISCLAIMER: The screening of your application will be conducted based on the information in your profile. Before applying, we strongly suggest that you review your profile to ensure completeness,

More information

Governors, Head teachers, Teachers and Local Authorities

Governors, Head teachers, Teachers and Local Authorities Title: Model Performance Management Policy for Schools Function: Information Status: Strongly recommended Audience: Governors, Head teachers, Teachers and Local Authorities Issued: March 2007 Model Performance

More information

PRINCIPLES FOR EVALUATION OF DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE

PRINCIPLES FOR EVALUATION OF DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE PRINCIPLES FOR EVALUATION OF DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE PARIS, 1991 DAC Principles for Evaluation of Development Assistance Development Assistance Committee Abstract: The following

More information

MODEL PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT POLICY WALES

MODEL PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT POLICY WALES MODEL PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT POLICY WALES The largest teachers union in Wales 1 CONTENTS These are the sections of the performance management model policy. Page Application of the policy Purpose Links

More information

UNICEF Global Evaluation Report Oversight System (GEROS) Review Template

UNICEF Global Evaluation Report Oversight System (GEROS) Review Template EVALUATION ID 1430-2015/003 UNICEF Global Evaluation Report Oversight System (GEROS) Review Template Colour Coding CC Dark green Green Amber Red White s Outstanding Satisfactory No Not Applicable Section

More information

TERMINAL EVALUATION TERMS OF REFERENCE

TERMINAL EVALUATION TERMS OF REFERENCE TERMINAL EVALUATION TERMS OF REFERENCE BASIC INFORMATON Location: Uganda Application Deadline: July 30 th, 2015 Type of Contract: Individual Contract Post Level: International Consultant Languages Required:

More information

Universal Periodic Review

Universal Periodic Review Universal Periodic Review Civil society Follow-up Kit 2014 Nomenclature CAT CRPD ECOSOC HRC ICC ICESCR MIA NGO NHRI OHCHR SuR UPR Convention against Torture Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

More information

Monitoring and Evaluation Plan Primer for DRL Grantees

Monitoring and Evaluation Plan Primer for DRL Grantees Monitoring and Evaluation Plan Primer for DRL Grantees I. What is a monitoring and evaluation plan? A monitoring and evaluation plan (M&E plan), sometimes also referred to as a performance monitoring or

More information

4 MEAL planning and budgeting

4 MEAL planning and budgeting Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning (MEAL) Keywords: Monitoring, evaluation, accountability, learning, plan, budget Introduction In this session on MEAL Planning and Budgeting, you will

More information

************************ REQUEST FOR EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST FOR AN INDIVIDUAL CONSULTANT AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK

************************ REQUEST FOR EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST FOR AN INDIVIDUAL CONSULTANT AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK ************************ REQUEST FOR EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST FOR AN INDIVIDUAL CONSULTANT AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK 01 B.P. 1387 Abidjan 01 - Côte d Ivoire 8 th floor, office 8A/CCIA Building. IDEV Department

More information

WH+ST. Action Plan 2013-2015. UNESCO World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism Programme

WH+ST. Action Plan 2013-2015. UNESCO World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism Programme UNESCO World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism Programme WH+ST Action Plan 2013-2015 The new WH+ST Programme will bring together a broad set of World Heritage and tourism stakeholders in the implementation

More information

Module 4 Information Exchange, International Cooperation and Assistance

Module 4 Information Exchange, International Cooperation and Assistance ATT Implementation Toolkit Module 4 Information exchange, International cooperation Arms Trade Treaty Implementation Toolkit Module 4 Information Exchange, International Cooperation and Assistance Available

More information

Methodology Second External Evaluation of the Rental Support Cash Grant (RSCG) approach applied to Return and Relocation programs in Haiti

Methodology Second External Evaluation of the Rental Support Cash Grant (RSCG) approach applied to Return and Relocation programs in Haiti Second External Evaluation of the Rental Support Cash Grant (RSCG) approach applied to Return and Relocation programs in Haiti The evaluation will have to respond to the following questions which may be

More information

AusAID NGO Cooperation Program. Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Framework. May 2012

AusAID NGO Cooperation Program. Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Framework. May 2012 AusAID NGO Cooperation Program Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Framework May 2012 Disclaimer: This document outlines a proposed new monitoring, evaluation and learning framework (MELF) for the AusAID

More information

Internal Audit of the Georgia Country Office

Internal Audit of the Georgia Country Office Internal Audit of the Georgia Country Office Office of Internal Audit and Investigations (OIAI) Report 2013/48 Internal Audit of the Georgia Country Office (2013/48) 2 Summary The Office of Internal Audit

More information

APPLICATION GUIDELINES 2015 WWW.INTERCULTURALINNOVATION.ORG A PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN UNITED NATIONS ALLIANCE OF CIVILIZATIONS & BMW GROUP

APPLICATION GUIDELINES 2015 WWW.INTERCULTURALINNOVATION.ORG A PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN UNITED NATIONS ALLIANCE OF CIVILIZATIONS & BMW GROUP APPLICATION GUIDELINES 2015 WWW.INTERCULTURALINNOVATION.ORG A PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN UNITED NATIONS ALLIANCE OF CIVILIZATIONS & BMW GROUP THE INTERCULTURAL INNOVATION AWARD APPLICATION GUIDELINES 2015 Since

More information

4 Project Implementation and Monitoring

4 Project Implementation and Monitoring 4 Project Implementation and Monitoring Version 3, 29 July 2014 Contents 4. Implementation and Monitoring... 2 4.1 Project Implementation... 3 4.1.1 Setting up project implementation... 3 4.1.2 Development

More information

Regulation on the implementation of the Norwegian Financial Mechanism 2009-2014

Regulation on the implementation of the Norwegian Financial Mechanism 2009-2014 Regulation on the implementation of the Norwegian Financial Mechanism 2009-2014 adopted by the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs pursuant to Article 8.8 of the Agreement between the Kingdom of Norway

More information

1. Title: Support for International Development Research

1. Title: Support for International Development Research Ministry of Foreign Affairs TAS File no.: 104.C.110.b. Internal Grant Committee Meeting 2 April 2014 Agenda Item no.: 2 1. Title: Support for International Development Research 2. Partners: African Economic

More information

PERARES PROJECT EVALUATIONS

PERARES PROJECT EVALUATIONS PERARES PROJECT EVALUATIONS The checklist and survey forms in the following pages are proposed for use in 2012 2014 by Perares partners in evaluation of projects they undertake within Perares or independently

More information

SOCIAL SAFETY NETS IN WEST AFRICA

SOCIAL SAFETY NETS IN WEST AFRICA Annex A SOCIAL SAFETY NETS IN WEST AFRICA PROJECT BRIEF TEMPLATE (PB) Funding by ECOWAS and the Spanish Cooperation Deadline for receipt of applications: March 20, 2015 Applicant s name: Dossier N (For

More information

Guidance notes and templates for Project Technical Review involving Independent Expert(s)

Guidance notes and templates for Project Technical Review involving Independent Expert(s) Guidance notes and templates for Project Technical Review involving Independent Expert(s) FP7 Collaborative Projects (CP), Networks of Excellence, Coordination and Support Actions (CSA), CP-CSA, ERA-NET,

More information

QUALITY ASSURANCE OPERATIONAL FRAMEWORK. University of Liverpool. Liverpool, L69 7ZX. And. Laureate

QUALITY ASSURANCE OPERATIONAL FRAMEWORK. University of Liverpool. Liverpool, L69 7ZX. And. Laureate QUALITY ASSURANCE OPERATIONAL FRAMEWORK The University of Liverpool Liverpool, L69 7ZX And INTRODUCTION Laureate The Institutional Agreement is between (1) the University of Liverpool ( UoL ) whose registered

More information

Guideline. Records Management Strategy. Public Record Office Victoria PROS 10/10 Strategic Management. Version Number: 1.0. Issue Date: 19/07/2010

Guideline. Records Management Strategy. Public Record Office Victoria PROS 10/10 Strategic Management. Version Number: 1.0. Issue Date: 19/07/2010 Public Record Office Victoria PROS 10/10 Strategic Management Guideline 5 Records Management Strategy Version Number: 1.0 Issue Date: 19/07/2010 Expiry Date: 19/07/2015 State of Victoria 2010 Version 1.0

More information

Ethical Trading Initiative Management Benchmarks

Ethical Trading Initiative Management Benchmarks Ethical Trading Initiative Management Benchmarks The Management Benchmarks are the means by which ETI (a) sets out its expectations of members and (b) measures members progress in applying the ETI Base

More information

CROATIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS REPUBLIC OF CROATIA MAIN (STATISTICAL) BUSINESS PROCESSES INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILLING OUT THE TEMPLATE

CROATIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS REPUBLIC OF CROATIA MAIN (STATISTICAL) BUSINESS PROCESSES INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILLING OUT THE TEMPLATE CROATIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS REPUBLIC OF CROATIA MAIN (STATISTICAL) BUSINESS PROCESSES INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILLING OUT THE TEMPLATE CONTENTS INTRODUCTION... 3 1. SPECIFY NEEDS... 4 1.1 Determine needs for

More information

OUTLINE TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR CONSULTING SERVICES

OUTLINE TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR CONSULTING SERVICES A. Introduction OUTLINE TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR CONSULTING SERVICES 1. Interdisciplinary international and national consultants with extensive experience in climate change planning, project planning and

More information

TERMS OF REFERENCE. Assessing and Strengthening Legal Awareness Raising Initiatives with Youth Bhutan National Legal Institute (BNLI)

TERMS OF REFERENCE. Assessing and Strengthening Legal Awareness Raising Initiatives with Youth Bhutan National Legal Institute (BNLI) TERMS OF REFERENCE Assessing and Strengthening Legal Awareness Raising Initiatives with Youth Bhutan National Legal Institute (BNLI) 1 Contracting Agency: Coordinating Agency: Place: United Nations Development

More information

Career Development Policy

Career Development Policy 1 Career Development Policy POLICY RECORD DETAILS DATE AGREED: 24th September 2010 VERSION No. POLICY OWNER: ORGANISATION DEVELOPMENT MANAGER JOB TITLE Dept / Directorate HUMAN RESOURCES CONTRIBUTORS:

More information

http://impact.zewo.ch/en/impact Stiftung Zewo Schweizerische Zertifizierungsstelle für gemeinnützige, Spenden sammelnde Organisationen

http://impact.zewo.ch/en/impact Stiftung Zewo Schweizerische Zertifizierungsstelle für gemeinnützige, Spenden sammelnde Organisationen These guidelines are designed to help project managers to assess the outcomes of their projects and programmes. They demonstrate how development agencies can implement an appropriate outcome and impact

More information

KPI UN Women Response Key Actions I. UN-Women s organisational effectiveness KPI 1: Providing direction for results

KPI UN Women Response Key Actions I. UN-Women s organisational effectiveness KPI 1: Providing direction for results KPI UN Women Response Key Actions I. UN-Women s organisational effectiveness KPI 1: Providing direction for results KPI 2: Corporate strategy and mandate KPI 3: Corporate focus on results KPI 4: Focus

More information

Proposal Writing Simplified for NGOs in Developing Countries

Proposal Writing Simplified for NGOs in Developing Countries Proposal Writing Simplified for NGOs in Developing Countries A Short Guide Prepared by: Copyright Notice All Right Reserved fundsforngos No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in

More information

Logical Framework: Making it Results-Oriented

Logical Framework: Making it Results-Oriented 1 of 11 2001-04-05 09:58 Logical Framework: Making it Results-Oriented Table of Contents 1. Introduction 2. Purpose of Guide 3. The LFA Process 4. The Logical Framework Structure 5. The Vertical Logic

More information

Research Guide for Assessing National Capacities for Environmental Economics in Developing Countries and Countries with Economies in Transition

Research Guide for Assessing National Capacities for Environmental Economics in Developing Countries and Countries with Economies in Transition Research Guide for Assessing National Capacities for Environmental Economics in Developing Countries and Countries with Economies in Transition 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Purpose This research guide has been

More information

Organizational Structure and Policies

Organizational Structure and Policies Organizational Structure and Policies I. Introduction The purpose of this document is to describe the organizational structure and development process for the Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops. The

More information

HARRIS FEDERATION MANAGERS GUIDE TO PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL: HOW IT ALL WORKS IN PRACTICE

HARRIS FEDERATION MANAGERS GUIDE TO PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL: HOW IT ALL WORKS IN PRACTICE HARRIS FEDERATION MANAGERS GUIDE TO PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL: HOW IT ALL WORKS IN PRACTICE 1. All Teaching Staff will be sent a letter from the Principal (see Appendix 3) with a copy of the Performance Appraisal

More information

Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, Post Disaster Need Assessment (PDNA) Training Manual

Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, Post Disaster Need Assessment (PDNA) Training Manual Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation and Development (MRRD) Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation & Development Post Disaster Need Assessment (PDNA) Training Manual Social Protection

More information

7. ASSESSING EXISTING INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND INFORMATION NEEDS: INFORMATION GAP ANALYSIS

7. ASSESSING EXISTING INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND INFORMATION NEEDS: INFORMATION GAP ANALYSIS 7. ASSESSING EXISTING INFORMATION 6. COMMUNITY SYSTEMS AND LEVEL INFORMATION MONITORING NEEDS: OF THE INFORMATION RIGHT TO ADEQUATE GAP ANALYSIS FOOD 7. ASSESSING EXISTING INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND INFORMATION

More information

United Nations Core Values: Integrity, Professionalism, Respect for Diversity

United Nations Core Values: Integrity, Professionalism, Respect for Diversity Vacancy Details DISCLAIMER: The screening of your application will be conducted based on the information in your profile. Before applying, we strongly suggest that you review your profile to ensure completeness,

More information

Ninth Round PROJECT MONITORING, REPORTING, REVISION AND EXTENSION GUIDELINES

Ninth Round PROJECT MONITORING, REPORTING, REVISION AND EXTENSION GUIDELINES Ninth Round PROJECT MONITORING, REPORTING, REVISION AND EXTENSION GUIDELINES For all reporting templates, please visit the UNDEF website: http://www.un.org/democracyfund/grantees/grantees_r7.html This

More information

TERMS OF REFERENCE Research Socio-Economic Survey, Armenia

TERMS OF REFERENCE Research Socio-Economic Survey, Armenia TERMS OF REFERENCE Research Socio-Economic Survey, Armenia 1. POSITION: Research (Company, NGO, Research Institution) assessment of the economic and social impact of unsustainable forest practices and

More information

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE OF THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS MULTI-YEAR GRANT APPLICATION GUIDANCE External Relations Division Government Office, Bucks Road Douglas, Isle of Man, IM1 3PN January 2015

More information

URBACT III OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME (2014-2020) CALL FOR PROPOSALS FOR THE CREATION OF 20 ACTION-PLANNING NETWORKS

URBACT III OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME (2014-2020) CALL FOR PROPOSALS FOR THE CREATION OF 20 ACTION-PLANNING NETWORKS URBACT III OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME (2014-2020) CALL FOR PROPOSALS FOR THE CREATION OF 20 ACTION-PLANNING NETWORKS Open 30 March 2015 16 June 2015 1 TABLE OF CONTENT INTRODUCTION... 3 SECTION 1 - ABOUT URBACT

More information

SVN/MM040. Open to Internal and External Candidates

SVN/MM040. Open to Internal and External Candidates SVN/MM040 Open to Internal and External Candidates Position Title : Senior Programme Associate TB Duty Station : Yangon, Myanmar Classification : General Service Staff, Grade G-6 Type of Appointment :

More information

Multilateral Aid Review: Assessment of International Organisation for Migration

Multilateral Aid Review: Assessment of International Organisation for Migration Multilateral Aid Review: Assessment of International Organisation for Migration Summary Organisation: International Organisation Date: February 2011 for Migration Description of Organisation The organisation

More information

International environmental governance. Bali Strategic Plan for Technology Support and Capacity-building

International environmental governance. Bali Strategic Plan for Technology Support and Capacity-building UNITED NATIONS UNEP/GC.23/6/Add.1 EP Governing Council of the United Nations Environment Programme Distr.: General 23 December 2004 Original: English Twenty-third session of the Governing Council/ Global

More information

Concept Note: Common Humanitarian Fund

Concept Note: Common Humanitarian Fund Concept Note: Common Humanitarian Fund Central African Republic I. Context Since 2005 the humanitarian situation in the north of the Central African Republic (CAR) has deteriorated severely, as a consequence

More information

CHILDREN AND ADULTS SERVICE RESEARCH APPROVAL GROUP

CHILDREN AND ADULTS SERVICE RESEARCH APPROVAL GROUP DURHAM COUNTY COUNCIL CHILDREN AND ADULTS SERVICE RESEARCH APPROVAL GROUP INFORMATION PACK Children and Adults Service Version 4 October 2015 Children and Adults Service Research Approval Group Page 1

More information

New Energy Jobs Fund. Application Guidelines

New Energy Jobs Fund. Application Guidelines New Energy Jobs Fund Application Guidelines i Table of Contents 1. Background... 1 2. The Program... 1 2.1. Objectives... 1 2.2. Overview... 1 2.3. Program Timetable... 2 3. Funding... 3 4. Eligibility...

More information

PROPOSAL PREPARATION USING THE LOGICAL FRAMEWORK APPROACH DAY 4

PROPOSAL PREPARATION USING THE LOGICAL FRAMEWORK APPROACH DAY 4 PROPOSAL PREPARATION USING THE LOGICAL FRAMEWORK APPROACH DAY 4 Cook Islands Facilitators: Damien Sweeney & Martin Pritchard Pacific Research & Evaluation Associates 1 Recap Day 3 http://office.microsoft.com/en-au/images/?ctt=97

More information

1.1 Terms of Reference Y P N Comments/Areas for Improvement

1.1 Terms of Reference Y P N Comments/Areas for Improvement 1 Scope of Internal Audit 1.1 Terms of Reference Y P N Comments/Areas for Improvement 1.1.1 Do Terms of Reference: a) Establish the responsibilities and objectives of IA? b) Establish the organisational

More information

SELF ASSESSMENT GUIDE FOR PLACEMENT SERVICE PROVIDERS 2009/2010

SELF ASSESSMENT GUIDE FOR PLACEMENT SERVICE PROVIDERS 2009/2010 SELF ASSESSMENT GUIDE FOR PLACEMENT SERVICE PROVIDERS 2009/2010 Electronic copies of this document are available by contacting the Manager Standards Monitoring Unit on 9222 2598 CONTENTS OVERVIEW...3 PURPOSE

More information

Overview. EU Energy Focus. Key aspects of Horizon 2020. EU Energy Focus. Funding Actions eligibility and funding rates

Overview. EU Energy Focus. Key aspects of Horizon 2020. EU Energy Focus. Funding Actions eligibility and funding rates Overview Addressing the evaluation criteria 12 th March 2015 Introduction Topics covered by May deadline Evaluation criteria Key messages Evaluator comments Common feedback services Funded by the Department

More information

Part 1. MfDR Concepts, Tools and Principles

Part 1. MfDR Concepts, Tools and Principles Part 1. Concepts, Tools and Principles 3 Overview Part 1. MfDR Concepts, Tools and Principles M anaging for Development Results (MfDR) is multidimensional, relating back to concepts about how to make international

More information

Activity Guide Innovation & Growth Nova Scotia Public Service Commission

Activity Guide Innovation & Growth Nova Scotia Public Service Commission TALENT MANAGEMENT Activity Guide This document is protected by copyright. The consent of the copyright owner must be obtained for reproduction. Innovation & Growth Nova Scotia Public Service Commission

More information

Cleveland College of Art & Design BA (Hons) Fashion Enterprise Programme Handbook 2013-2014 1

Cleveland College of Art & Design BA (Hons) Fashion Enterprise Programme Handbook 2013-2014 1 Cleveland College of Art & Design BA (Hons) Fashion Enterprise Programme Handbook 2013-2014 1 BA (Hons) Fashion Enterprise Programme Handbook 2013-2014 Your Programme Handbook provides you with a range

More information

A framework of operating principles for managing invited reviews within healthcare

A framework of operating principles for managing invited reviews within healthcare A framework of operating principles for managing invited reviews within healthcare January 2016 Background 03 Introduction 04 01 Purpose 05 02 Responsibility 06 03 Scope 07 04 Indemnity 08 05 Advisory

More information

Draft conclusions proposed by the Chair. Recommendation of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation

Draft conclusions proposed by the Chair. Recommendation of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation United Nations FCCC/SBI/2012/L.47 Distr.: Limited 1 December 2012 Original: English Subsidiary Body for Implementation Thirty-seventh session Doha, 26 November to 1 December 2012 Agenda item 14 Article

More information

Background Information - UNOPS

Background Information - UNOPS DISCLAIMER: The screening of your application will be conducted based on the information in your profile. Before applying, we strongly suggest that you review your profile to ensure completeness, especially

More information

Procedure Selection and performance evaluation of experts on the CDM Registration and Issuance Team and Methodologies rosters of experts

Procedure Selection and performance evaluation of experts on the CDM Registration and Issuance Team and Methodologies rosters of experts CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM CDM-EB83-A16-PROC Procedure Selection and performance evaluation of experts on the CDM Registration and Issuance Team and Methodologies rosters of experts TABLE OF CONTENTS

More information

Terms of Reference (TOR) For Impact Evaluation of ANN Project

Terms of Reference (TOR) For Impact Evaluation of ANN Project Terms of Reference (TOR) For Impact Evaluation of ANN Project Post Title: Rural Aquaculture Development (Impact Evaluation) Expert (International) Location: Oshakati Extension Office and Omahenene Inland

More information

Ref: 2015/36 5 May 2015

Ref: 2015/36 5 May 2015 1818 H Street, NW MSN P4-400 Washington, DC 20433 USA Tel: 202.458.7347 Fax: 202.522.3240/3245 E-mail: afbsec@adaptation-fund.org Ref: 2015/36 5 May 2015 To Parties Designated Authorities for the Adaptation

More information

Scheduling and Review of Project Activities

Scheduling and Review of Project Activities Project Implementation Manual Scheduling and Review of Project Activities 1. INTRODUCTION 2. UNDERSTANDING CONTRACTUAL OBBLIGATIONS 3. PLANNING, MONITORING & AUDITING 4. PROCUREMENT 5. REPORTING 1.1 Purpose

More information

Evaluation. Evaluation Document 2006, No. 1. Office GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY. The GEF Monitoring and. Evaluation. Policy

Evaluation. Evaluation Document 2006, No. 1. Office GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY. The GEF Monitoring and. Evaluation. Policy Evaluation Office GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY Evaluation Document 2006, No. 1 The GEF Monitoring and Evaluation Policy Global Environment Facility Evaluation Office The GEF Monitoring and Evaluation Policy

More information

Tweet. Share. Applications to vacancies must be received before midnight Copenhagen time (CET) on the closing date of the announcement.

Tweet. Share. Applications to vacancies must be received before midnight Copenhagen time (CET) on the closing date of the announcement. Tweet Share DISCLAIMER: The screening of your application will be conducted based on the information in your profile. Before applying, we strongly suggest that you review your profile to ensure completeness,

More information

Key Considerations for MANAGING EVALUATIONS

Key Considerations for MANAGING EVALUATIONS Key Considerations for MANAGING EVALUATIONS Authors: (Brief Reference Guide) Dr. Rita Sonko, Addis Berhanu and Rodwell Shamu Pact South Africa June 2011 1 P age This publication is made possible by the

More information