Knowledge Management

April 2009

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

Eligible countries

Rate of Success

%

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

Approvals

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

MDG-F Approval Processes

lll

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

Strategies

Monitoring and evaluation Knowledge management Communications and advocacy

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

Thank You

Culture and Development Logo in BiH

MDG-F Culture JP in Egypt