2013 Report on the Evaluation Function of UN-Women

1. 2013Report on the Evaluation Function of UN-Women Informal Executive Board MeetingJune 2014 New York, NY Marco Segone Director, UN Women independent Evaluation Office

2. Outline • The evaluation function in UN-Women • Corporate Evaluation • Decentralized Evaluation • UN System wide coordination on gender-responsive evaluation • Gender-responsive national evaluation capacities • The independent Evaluation Office's programme of work for 2014 • Approved budget for the independent Evaluation Office 2014 work plan

3. I. The Evaluation Function • The Evaluation Policy became effective in 2013 • The strategic goal of the evaluation function is to strengthen UN-Women’s capability to achieve • Normative, • Operational, and • UN Coordination

4. Governance of the Evaluation Function • The Evaluation Policy outlines the governance system of the evaluation function • The USG/ED is the main champion of Evaluation within UN-Women • The Director of the independent Evaluation Office reports directly to the USG/ED, and annually to the Executive Board • A Global Evaluation Advisory Committee established

5. Performance of the Evaluation Function • IEO established the Global Evaluation Oversight System • A dashboard presenting, in a user-friendly manner, key performance indicators for the evaluation function

6. KPI 1: Financial resources invested in evaluation • 1.3% of total UN-Women expenditure invested in the evaluation function

7. KPI 2: Human resources • At HQ: 9 staff members: 5 mid-level professionals, 2 general service staff and 1 consultant • The post of Evaluation Chief upgraded to Director Post (D1) • At decentralized level: 4 Regional Evaluation Specialists • 24% of country offices have M&E officers, 59% M&E Focal Points and 17% no M&E Focal Point

8. KPI 3: Coverage and types of evaluations managed • 67% of country offices conducted at least one evaluation (2011 to 2013) • All impact areas of the UN Women’s Strategic Plan covered • 1/4 of evaluations were joint evaluations

9. KPI 4: Implementation rate of planned evaluations • 82% implementation rate (55% completed and 27% ongoing) • 18% planned but not implemented (14% not initiated and 4% cancelled)

10. KPI 5: Submission rate of completed evaluation reports to the GATE • 100% reports uploaded and made available in the public website (GATE)

11. KPI 6: Quality of evaluation reports • 85% rated as “satisfactory” and above (26% rated very good) • 4 reports (15%) rated as “unsatisfactory”

12. KPI 7: Use of evaluation, including management response • 85% of completed evaluations with management response developed and uploaded • 88% of the 407 actions committed in 2012 being implemented (58% completed and 30% ongoing); 4% not initiated and 8% have no specific deadline

13. Decentralized Evaluation System • 89% of evaluations managed at the decentralized level • Systems to enhance decentralized evaluation established and strengthened • Technical support, oversight and quality assurance delivered by Regional Evaluation Specialists • Costed evaluation plans aligned with Strategic Notes • Internal evaluation capacity development

14. II. System wide coordination on evaluation • Gender-responsive evaluations through the United Nations Evaluation Group promoted • UNEG Vice-Chair • Co-led the UNEG Task Force on National Evaluation Capacity Development • Active member of other task forces • System-Wide Action Plan (SWAP) on Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment: systematizing and harmonizing reporting on evaluation • Led the piloting of the UN-SWAP scorecard • Organized training sessions, webinars, and UN-SWAP help-desk function • 58 entities reported against the UN-SWAP indicators

15. II. System wide coordination on evaluation • System-wide Evaluation Policy • Contributed to the consultation leading to the development of the system-wide Evaluation Policy through UNEG • Inclusion on gender equality in the norms and standards for system-wide evaluation • Strengthening regional UN evaluation groups • Supporting joint evaluations and UNDAF evaluations • 1/3 of UN-Women evaluations were joint evaluations • UNDAF evaluations • The Gender Equality Evaluation Portal: evidence-based knowledge on the internet • 352 reports from 55 different agencies (an increase of 20% from last year)

16. III. Supporting Gender-Responsive Evaluation Capacities

17. III. Supporting Gender-Responsive Evaluation Capacities • An enabling environment for evaluation strengthened • 2015 declared as International Year of Evaluation • Parliamentarian Forums in South Asia and Africa • Institutional capacities to demand, manage and use evaluations strengthened

18. III. Supporting Gender-Responsive Evaluation Capacities • Individual capacities of evaluatorsstrengthened Total cumulative number of visitors to EvalPartners’ MyM&E platform Total cumulative number of page downloads of EvalPartners’ MyM&Eplatform

19. IV. Programme of work for 2014 • Four priority areas: • Effective corporate evaluations implemented • Effective decentralized evaluations system implemented • United Nations coordination on gender responsive evaluation promoted • National evaluation capacities for gender responsive evaluation systems strengthened

20. Approved 2014 budget

21. Conclusions • UN Women has a strong evaluation function as demonstrated by its Key Performance Indicators. However, improvements are needed in certain areas • Independent Evaluation Office is strategically contributing to strengthening gender-responsive capacities within the UN system as well as at national level • To strengthen UNW evaluation function even further, a UNEG peer review, JIU and OIOS external assessments will be carried out in 2014 and reported in 2015