MODULE 3 HOW TO DEFINE

UNDAF OUTPUTS AND OUTCOMES

RBM/M&E for UNDAF Workshop Cairo 06/2011Thomas Winderl, Consultant for Planning, Monitoring & Evaluation

thomas@winderl.net

• Checklist: Six criteria for good result statementsGroup work: defining outcome and outputs of a

“Mini-UNDAF“• How to define risks and assumptions for the UNDAF

Group work: defining risks and assumptions of a “Mini-UNDAF”

Is the UNDAF result defined on the right level (outputs - outcome)?

Is the UNDAF result as clear as possible?

Does the UNDAF result express only a single idea?

Does the UNDAF result – to the extent possible - explicitly describe right-holders and duty-bearers?

Does the UNDAF result express a change rather than a process?

Is the UNDAF result as specific as possible?

CHECK-LIST Six criteria how to assess/define UNDAF results*

*or: SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time-Bound)

CRITERION 1:

Is the UNDAF result defined on the right level (outputs vs. outcome)?

Ask two set of questions to find out if an UNDAF result is an outcome:

Does it reflect a change in behaviour or performance by someone?Is the result largely beyond our control?Can we influence but are not fully responsible for delivering this result?

-> If yes, it is not an output but an outcome

Is it realistic to expect that the UNDAF outcome will be achieved mostly through UNDAF outputs?

-> If no, it is typcially • an umbrella for a diverse range of agency products• too high-level and influenced too much by external factors

but not a good UNDAF outcome for which the UN can be held accountable

Example: “Improved access to social services …”, “Reduced poverty …”“Better Governance …”

CRITERION 1:

Is the UNDAF result defined on the right level (outputs vs. outcome)?

REMARK ON CAPACITY-BUILDING:

Someone has (improved) capacity to do something different or better- > UNDAF output, not outcome

Example: “Ministry of Environment has the capacity to monitor protected areas”

Example: “Government is better able to formulate gender-sensitive policies”

Someone actually does something different or better- > UNDAF outcome

Example: “Ministry of Environment effectively monitors protected areas”

Example: “Government is formulates policies which are sensitive to gender”

similar logic applies to „having access to …“

Exercise: CORRECT THE RESULT LEVEL

Draft UNDAF Egypt 2012-16 / Outcome 5.3.:

„The Government of Egypt and local communities have strengthened mechanisms for sustainable management of and sustainable access to natural resources such as land, water and ecosystems“

„By 2016, the Government of Egypt sustainably manages and local communities have better access to natural resources“

Somalia Assistance Strategy 2011-2015 / Outcome 1.3.:

„Local authorities have the capacity to operationalize local development plans and ensure the provision of services […]“

„By 2015, local authorities operationalize local development plans and provide services […]“

Exercise: cont.

Draft UNDAF Egypt 2012-16 / Outcome 2.3.:

„The health system is strengthened to improve health literacy of vulnerable populations“

„By 2015, vulnerable people are more health literate“

Draft UNDAF Yemen 2012-2015 / Outcome 8:

„National capacities for evidence-based planning, implementation and monitoring of development programmes strengthened at all levels by 2015“

„By 2015, national authorities plan, implement and monitor development programmes based on better evidence“

CRITERION 2:

Is the UNDAF result as clear as possible?

Keep it simple (but not simplistic)

avoid •development jargon, •unclear concepts, •buzzwords, •abbreviations, •“/”, “and/or”•ambiguous formulations •bad grammar

Results need to be stated in plain language to •make monitoring possible•for accountability•to be able to communicate the UNDAF

UNDAF OUTCOME:“Relevant authorities mainstream / introduce capacity poverty into policies, plans and programmes through an enabling framework for RDG which facilitates the utilization of synergies among key sectors”

Exercise: clarity in result statements

Somalia Assistance Strategy 2011-2015 / Outcome 2.2.:

„Livelihood assets of people in Humanitarian Emergency, Acute Food and Livelihoos Crisis are protected and restored according to the specific needs of different groups, including women and youth“

Draft UNDAF Egypt 2012-16 / Outcome 5.2.:

„The Government of Egypt, private sector and civil society have complied with Multilateral Environmental Agreements, adopted policies, and implemented operational measures towards a green sustainable economy and society, including, among others, EE, RE, low carbon cleaner technologcies, SWM, POPs, ODS, and CDM“

CRITERION 2:

Does the UNDAF result express only a single idea?

Good example: UNDAF Egypt 2012-2016 – Outcome 1.4.

“More and better skilled youth and women have decent job opportunities”

if more than a single idea is captured in an UNDAF result (‘compound result’), it tends to:

distort the clear, logical linkages within the results chainmakes monitoring and reporting more complex and cumbersomecan include different levels of results in one result statement look out for dangerous phrases like ‘through’, ‘for’, ‘and’, ‘in order to’, ‘which contribute to’, ‘with a focus on’

-> consider revising and narrowing down to a single idea, or

-> consider splitting up into more than 1 result

Exercise: SINGLE IDEA in result statements

Somalia Assistance Strategy 2011-2015 / Outcome 2.4.:

„Somali people are fairly and inclusively represented in elected and appointed government positions, and are able to hold their government accountable“

Draft UNDAF Egypt 2012-16 / Outcome 2.7.:

„Children in Egypt age 6-14 years have more access to and complete quality basic education with a special focus on vulnerable groups and gender equality“

Draft UNDAF Yemen 2012-16 / Outcome 1.:

„By 2015, coherent gender sensitive policies and strategies that are gender friendly to diversify economy, increase employment, decent work and productivitiy in the rural areas, SME and non-oil (fisheries, agriculture, industry and tourism) sectors are developed and implemented“

CRITERION 2:

Does the UNDAF result describe ‘right-holders’ and ‘duty-bearers’*?

Good UNDAF result statements clearly define (if it makes sense):•rights holders (typically individuals and groups with valid rights)•duty-bearers (typically state institutions with obligations*

-> ultimately, development is about people

on the output level:

describe tangible changes with regard to a) right-holders (greater access to new products, services, resources) and b) duty-bearers (new skills and abilities, responsibility, motivation, authority)

on the outcome level:

describe better performance or change in behaviour of a) rights holders to exercise and claim their rights, and of b) duty bearers to respect, protect and fulfill these rights

* Human Rights Based Approach (HRBA): integrates international human rights standards and principles in development activities

Example & Exercise: HRBA

UNDAF Syria 2012-2015 - UNDAF OUTCOME 3.: not using HRBA: “Food security enhanced […]”using HRBA : „By 2015, the Ministry of Agriculture makes vulnerable

groups in Syria* more food secure“

UNDAF Somalia 2012-2015 - UNDAF OUTCOME 3.4.: not using HRBA: “Security is improved […] for all Somalis“using HRBA : ??????

UNDAF Somalia 2012-2015 - UNDAF OUTCOME 2.4.: not using HRBA: “Access and utilization of natural resources is

sustainably managed“using HRBA : ??????

CRITERION 5:

Does the UNDAF result express a change rather than a process?

• do not describe the action itself (action language)• instead, describe the results of actions (change language)• including the year when we expect to achieve the result („By 2016 ..“)

helps to keep the language focused on action

Draft UNDAF Egypt 2012-16: Outcome 2.3.

The health system is strengthened to improve health literacy of vulnerable populations (action language) By 2016, vulnerable groups in Egypt* are more health literate (change language)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Draft UNDAF Syria 2012-16: Outcome 3

[…] Consequences of climate change and natural disasters addressed to reduce socio-economic vulnerabilities (action language) By 2016, people in Syria are less vulnerable to the consequences of climate change and natural disasters (change language)

CRITERION 6:

Is the UNDAF result as specific as possible?

ask the following questions:

specify: Example

INITIAL UNDAF OUTCOME:

More and better trained students graduate

By how much? + quantity Number of graduates increased from 50.000 to 145.000

What kind of change?

+ quality The number of graduates passing standard exams has increased from 50.000 to 145.000

By when? + time frame By 2016, the number of graduates passing standard exams has increased from 50.000 to 145.000

For whom? + target group By 2016, the number of graduates from lower income families passing standard exams has increased from 50.000 to 145.000 in year three of project

Where? + location MORE SPECIFIC UNDAF OUTCOME:

By 2016, the number of graduates from lower income families passing standard exams in northern and north-eastern regions has increased from 50.000 to 145.000

CRITERION 6:

Is the UNDAF result as specific as possible?

ask the following questions:

specify: Example

INITIAL UNDAF OUTCOME : Improved nutritional status of vulnerable groups

By how much? + quantity reduced from 9% to 7%

What kind of change?

+ quality acute malnutrition

By when? + time frame by 2016

For whom? + target group vulnerable groups = children under 5 with acute malnutrition

Where? + location in Northern Country Undafistan

MORE SPECIFIC UNDAF OUTCOME:

By 2016, the proportion of children under 5 with acute malnutrition in Northern Undafistan has been reduced from 9% to 7%

Is the UNDAF result defined on the right level (outputs - outcome)?

Is the UNDAF result as clear as possible?

Does the UNDAF result express only a single idea?

Does the UNDAF result – to the extent possible - explicitly describe right-holders and duty-bearers?

Does the UNDAF result express a change rather than a process?

Is the UNDAF result as specific as possible?

SUMMARY: CHECK-LIST Six criteria how to assess/define UNDAF results

Group work: defining outcome and outputs of a “Mini-UNDAF” using the UNDAF matrix

Define one outcome and two outputs of a „Mini-UNDAF“ using the UNDAF results matrix

UNDAF RESULTS MATRIX

Results Indicator, Baseline and Target Means of Verification

Risks andAssumptions

Role of Partners

Indicative Resources

UNDAF Outcome 1:

(UN agencies, convener)

       

UNDAF Output 1.1.

(UN agencies)

UNDAF Output 1.1.

(UN agencies)

       

Impact

UNDAF Outcome

UNDAF Outputs

then As

su

mp

tion

s

if

under the assumption that

under the assumption that

then

if

threat to

threat to R

isks

SOME TIPS:

•risks and assumptions are by definition external (cannot be controlled by UN agencies)

•limit yourself to 1 – 3 most important risks and assumptions

•risks: something that does not exist yet; assumption: something that exists now;

•sometimes risks can we worded as assumptions; choose what makes more sense

•don‘t include: resource mobilization (implicit in last column of results matrix)

How to define risks and assumptions to logically link UNDAF outputs with outcomes

Group work: defining RISKS AND ASSUMPTIONS of a “Mini-UNDAF” using the UNDAF matrix

UNDAF RESULTS MATRIX

Results Indicator, Baseline and Target Means of Verification

Risks andAssumptions

Role of Partners

Indicative Resources

UNDAF Outcome 1:

(UN agencies, convener)

     

UNDAF Output 1.1.

(UN agencies)

•  …………….•  …………….•  …………….

UNDAF Output 1.1.

(UN agencies)

    •   …………….•  …………….•  …………….

 

Define 1 – 3 risks and assumptions linking your outputs to outcome in the „Mini-UNDAF“