Reports - United Nations Development Programme

COUNTRY EVALUATION: ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPMENT RESULTS – TURKEY
64
monitoring of project activities have been dependent on
support from the UNDP Country Office.
Monitoring and evaluation in Turkey have taken
several different forms: preparation of progress reports by
project staff, visits to the project site by UNDP staff, and
review meetings conducted jointly by the UNDP and the
Government. A significant number of project progress
reports have been generated for the key projects related to
GAP, LEAP and LA 21, but they do not seem to offer a
full coverage for the project time periods, and few
progress reports for other projects are available. In
general, the progress reports are generated by project
management and stress achievements in the field.
Comments from some donors indicate that this reporting
system has not been able to sufficiently pick up
operational or other problems with a view to take timely
corrective action or to draw lessons for future project
extensions. Visits to project sites by UNDP staff appear
to have taken place only on an occasional basis, and review
meetings with the Government also appear to have taken
place relatively infrequently.
Only one recent evaluation report was available to the
ADR Evaluation Team, studying lessons learned from the
LA 21 sub-project on disaster prevention and
preparedness. No complete project evaluations or
outcome evaluations appear to have been performed over
the last five years. In response to the RBM methodology,
ROARs have been prepared, commenting on progress
against outcomes specified in the SRF. Unfortunately, the
link between broad thematic outcome targets and specific
project activities and results is not clear in the
SRFs/ROARs and the descriptive text in the ROARs is
not detailed or specific enough to allow identification of
lessons learned, or to take corrective action based on
unforeseen operational or substantive issues.
The use by management of outputs from monitoring
and evaluation activities appears to have been restricted by
a limited capacity on the substantive programming side.
Over the last five years, a majority of the staff in the
UNDP Turkey office have been engaged in administrative
support for MSAs, in operational support for the UNCT,
in disaster response after two major earthquakes, and in
operational support for preparedness related to the Iraq
conflict. As a consequence, very little capacity was set
aside for substantive, analytical monitoring and support
to ongoing programmes, or to future programme
development. The office business processes are currently
being re-engineered to ensure a stronger focus on core
programme issues. A major challenge for the office in its
new structure will be to ensure that lessons learned are
carried forward, allowing future programmes to build on
successes and achievements.
E. DISSEMINATION AND PUBLIC ADVOCACY
For an organisation like the UNDP, dissemination of
key messages is crucial to carrying out its mandate
for advocacy related to central issues, such as MDGs,
where consensus and participation are absolutely needed
for results. Advocacy activities by UNDP Turkey are
organised through the following areas:
Global and National HDRs
Policy discussions at the country level, based on
MDGs and the human development concept
Private sector partnership
• corporate social responsibility, leading “UN
Global Compact” activities in Turkey
• seminars organised under the leadership of the
UNDP to introduce the private sector in Turkey
to “Business Opportunities with the UN System”
• contribution to Government/NGO level initiatives
to improve FDI flow into Turkey
Opportunistic/pragmatic approach in events/reports/
Headquarter messages/relevant UN issues and Human
Development Centre activities
Programmatic activities
In general, this has been a very successful area for the
UNDP in Turkey, especially since the creation of a Public
Information Officer post in 2001. One indicator is the
impressive list of media and other public appearances, as
shown in Annexe 10. The UNDP is frequently
referenced in the media and in speeches by politicians,
and is widely recognised as a competent and impartial
advocate for human development issues.
F. CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS ON
RESOURCES, METHODS AND APPROACHES
One of the biggest challenges that the UNDP faces in
managing its operations at this key juncture in Turkey
relates to continuing to rebuild substantive advisory and
analytical capacity in the Country Office, through which
it can take a full part in the development policy dialogue
in Turkey. Urgent action is needed to get a firm handle
on this issue, enabling the office to contribute to Turkey’s
twin challenges – EU accession and deepening human
development. Adapting, modernising and strengthening
other operational modalities (RBM, implementation
arrangements, monitoring and evaluation, and dissemination
and advocacy) will also be important. In the area of
monitoring and evaluation, there is a need for a thorough
review of current systems and practices. In the other
areas, promising new initiatives have been taken, for
example through the visioning exercise, and these should
move forward on an urgent basis.