knowledge management april 2009. background agreement signed between spain and undp on 18 december...
Post on 03-Jan-2016
215 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Background Agreement signed between Spain and
UNDP on 18 December 2006 Euros 528 million + 90 million (24 Sept.
2008) Supporting national priorities through joint
UN efforts towards the implementation of the MDGs
Supporting the implementation of the Paris Declaration/Accra
Administrative Agent = UNDP
UN Participating Organizations
FAO* UNFPA* UNWTO*
IFAD* UN Habitat* WFP*
ILO* UNHCR* WHO*
IOM* UNICEF* WMO
ITU UNIDO* World Bank*
UNAIDS* ITC
UNCDF* UNIFEM*
UNCTAD* UNODC* ECA
UN DESA UNOHCHR* ECE
UNDP* UNOPS* ECLAC*
UNEP* UNRWA* ESCAP*
UNESCO* UNV* ESCWA
Thematic Windows to Date
Window Allocation (US$) Approved (US$)
Gender 90,000,000 89,640,000
Environment 90,000,000 89,500,000
Economic Governance 60,000,000 59,625,000
Youth, Employment and Migration 80,000,000 70,281,000
Culture and Development 90,000,000 95,494,000
Conflict Prevention and Peace Building
96,000,000 94,000,000
Children, Nutrition and Food Security
135,000,000 134,500,000
Private Sector and Development 65,000,000 63,100,000
TOTAL $696,140,000
MDG-F: UN Agency Budget %
“Other” refers to UN Agencies with less than 3% and includes: IFAD, IOM, UNAIDS, ESCAP, ECLAC, WB, UNCDF, UNCTAD, UNEP, UNHCHR, UNHCR, UNHABITAT, UNOPS, UNODC, UNRWA, UNV, UNIFEM and UNWTO
Progress
All eight windows closed 81 approved joint programmes for over
$445 million to date 54 signed joint programmes 44 joint programmes with released funds
Lessons – Design and governanceOpportunities/strengths Light structure Secretariat role MDTF Office
Risks/weaknesses Transfer of funds
through UN Agency HQs
Technical sub-committees
Lessons – Formulation, approval and implementationOpportunities/strengths Broad range of JPs Discussion on joint
design and formulation
Opportunity to strengthen joint M&E
CN and JP feedback Misc. feedback
Risks/weaknesses Second round Lack of oversight by
Gov’t on funding Poor beneficiary
identification Capacity building =
technical assistance and workshops
RC accountable but little control
Role of the Resident Coordinator Focal point for the MDG-F Secretariat Represents the UNCT in the National
Steering Committee Mediates and resolves UN Agency
issues Etc.
lll
Lessons – M&E
Opportunities/strengths Opportunity to
further develop joint evaluation
Participatory M&E Standard
methodology KM potential
Risks/weaknesses Weak M&E culture UN Agencies and
KM
Lessons – Communication and advocacyOpportunities/strengths General
communication of the fund
Programmes and communication
Risks/weaknesses Many levels of
information One agency/one
donor?
Joint Programmes Quality is still an issue (about 50% return rate) Why?
Sharing between countries vs. lack of communication between JPs
National ownership vs. weak Steering CommitteeRBM and M&E savvy vs. lack of understanding re
concepts JP implementation
Lag in recruitmentLead agency/lead ministryJoint implementation and joint management
Knowledge Management Two tier approach
Electronic platform○ Similar to facebook○ Members include all partners associated with
JP including JP staff, Gov’t, UN Agencies, Spain etc.
○ Repository for documentation○ Networking, adhoc discussions
Convenor agencies○ Working with their Agency colleagues will
undertake KM on thematic areas
lll
KM and Convenor Agencies Starting point: MDG-F joint programmes Generating lessons learned to feed back
to the joint programmes Applying the joint UN concept to KM Cross-cutting issues such as gender,
joint programming etc. How to submit for funding?
lll
top related