Formulating UNDAF and UN Agency Outcomes

1
Formulating UNDAF and UN Agency Outcomes

• UNSSC HRBA/RBM Workshop,
• Kenya, July 2007

2
Recap on Outcomes

• Outcome - Institutional or behavioral change
  among individuals and groups in society
  
• Collective result of UN system and partner
  support in a particular area
  
• Achievement time frame 5 years
• Hierarchy of results UNDAF outcomes Agency
  outcomes

3
UNDAF Outcomes

• Highest level Results of UN system cooperation
• Collective outcome of UN system and partner
  support in a particular area - the combined
  effects of lower level Agency outcomes
  
• Reflects a decision about agreed area of
  cooperation, strategy or policy may be
  debatable controversial.
  
• Strategic and direct contribution tonational
  priorities, MDGs and human rights
  
• Suggested range of 3-5 UNDAF outcomes per
  country
  

4
Agency Outcomes

• The 2nd level Results of UN system cooperation
• Sum of the agency outcomes contribute to the
  achievement of UNDAF outcomes
  
• 6 to 8 Agency Outcomes suggested per UNDAF
  outcome
  
• Accountability may be single agency, but is
  increasingly shared
  
• Produced by the combined effects of the CP
  outputs
  
• Normally not as controversial and debatable as
  UNDAF outcomes (but may be)
  

5
Measuring outcomes

• Indicators describe how achievement of the
  intended results will be measured system of
  accountability
  
• Objectively verifiable, repeatable measures of
  the institutional performance or behavior we wish
  to see
  
• They force clarification of what is meant by the
  outcome
  
• Targets ambitious enough to show a contribution
  to the 2015 MDG
  
• A statement of the UN niche in the country

6
The Results Matrix
7
Typical pitfalls

• Wordy (..and no change language)
• To promote equitable economic development and
  democratic governance in accordance with
  international norms by strengthening national
  capacities at all levels and empowering citizens
  and increasing their participation in
  decision-making processes
• Too ambitious
• Strengthened rule of law, equal access to
  justice and the promotion of rights
  
• Containing multiple results
• The state improves its delivery of services and
  its protection of rightswith the involvement of
  civil society and in compliance with its
  international commitments

8
Typical pitfalls

• Wishy-washy (ie. Support provided to improve..)
• Support to institutional capacity building for
  improved governance
  
• So general, they could mean anything
• To promote sustainable development and increase
  capacity at municipal level
  
• Overlapping with National goals/ MDGs (impacts)
• Substantially reduce the level of poverty and
  income inequality in accordance with the MDGs and
  PRSP
  
• Confusing means and ends
• Strengthen the protection of natural resources
  through the creation of an enabling environment
  that promotes sound resources management
  
• Summarising the CP outcomes

9
Validation of Outcomes

• Does the outcome address one of the underlying or
  root causes in the CCA
  
• Does it contain a human rights perspective
• Will this outcome impact on the most vulnerable
  and excluded people
  
• Crisis prevention

10
Validation of Outcomes

• Can the UN system help achieve this outcome
• Resources?
• Capacity?
• Comparative advantage?
• Best practices?
• Problems linked to this outcome are..
• Getting worse
• Not addressed by others

11
Less is More

• Focus on a few key national priorities
• Focus on areas where the UN is most effective
• Work together and find synergies

12
Group work

• Three groups as before
• In Groups
• Using the checklist provided in your folder,
  review and assess the quality of the UNDAF
  outcomes and indicators provided
  
• Does it use change language
• Does it contain a human rights perspective
• Re-formulate two or three UNDAF outcomes and
  their indicators to improve their quality