UNDP | Evaluation

	The evaluation function works to enhance the development effectiveness of UNDP to help men and women build a better life. It strengthens accountability and learning through evaluation and partnership
New
Evaluation policy of UNDP
The revised evaluation policy of UNDP was approved by the Executive Board in January 2011. This policy reflects the Executive Board decision on the independent review of the first evaluation policy (2006) and the management response. Revisions were made to clarify roles and responsibilities and to improve the evaluation practice in UNDP. Notably, greater importance has been given to national ownership in evaluation; national evaluation capacity development; and use of evaluation for organizational learning and accountability. A new compliance requirement for decentralized evaluations has also been introduced in this policy. The policy applies to UNDP (global, regional, country, south-south programmes and all other programmatic activities), as well as its associated fund and programme – the United Nations Capital Development Fund (UNCDF) and the United Nations Volunteers (UNV) programme, and will be subject to periodic independent review.
Assessment of Development Results: Thailand
		The report validated the effectiveness of many UNDP initiatives especially at the sub-national level. UNDP has also provided targeted assistance to vulnerable and marginalized population groups. Ensuring the sustainability of development results however has been a challenge. It has not sufficiently integrated its initiatives into national actions, and should further reposition itself into the role suitable to the middle-income country context. The outreach of its advocacy should also be extended. It should use its global network more effectively in support of South-South cooperation.
Assessment of Development Results: Laos
		The evaluation found that UNDP has made important contributions, helping the Government coordinate development assistance and integrate poverty reduction into its national development plan, strengthen local governance, built a national system for UXO clearance, and align its legal system to international environmental conventions. Further effort would be needed for the benefit of its work to reach ordinary citizens: the plan needs to be implemented in a truly pro-poor manner, the capacity developed needs to be utilized and the laws and regulations need to be enforced. UNDP programme itself needs to be more pro-poor and gender-mainstreamed in substance.
Assessment of Development Results: Malawi
		The evaluation found some highly successful interventions that have helped situate UNDP as an important partner. UNDP has done exemplary work in supporting elections, strengthening communities to hold the Government accountable, empowering women for financial inclusion and managing disasters. In moving forward, UNDP performance would be strengthened by improving coherence among its programmes, balancing the nature of upstream and downstream work, expanding partnerships and improving the quality of programme design to enhance sustainability.
Assessment of Development Results: Papua New Guinea
		The evaluation found that UNDP contributions have been important in terms of responding to national priorities and government needs. During the period covered by the evaluation, UNDP technical support to the government strengthened institutional development and enhanced policy formulation. Although some of the areas were not key government priorities, UNDP interventions in the areas of MDG planning and monitoring, governance, HIV and AIDS, conflict prevention and recovery, energy and environment and disaster risk management responded to key national needs and priorities.
Assessment of Development Results: Brazil
		The evaluation found that UNDP was well positioned as a development partner of the Government of Brazil. Its positioning was based on the promotion of human development and on its capacity for project management. It also found that the contribution to the achievement of development results by thematic area was highly relevant, moderately effective and efficient, and highly responsive. The analysis of the sample of projects used for the evaluation showed that the benefits of UNDP contributions were sustainable to a limited extent.