Regional Office for East and Southern Africa (Kenya)
Select Evaluation Unit Afghanistan African Union Liaison Office - Ethiopia Albania Algeria Anguilla Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Aruba Bahamas Bangladesh Barbados Belize Bermuda Bolivia Bonaire Bosnia Herzegovina Brazil British Virgin Islands Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chile China Civil Society Division Colombia Cote d'Ivoire Curacao Democratic Republic of Congo Dominica Dominican Republic Dummy Unit Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Ethiopia Executive Director's Office Fund for Gender Equality Georgia Ghana Grenada Guatemala Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Honduras Human Resources Division Independent Evaluation Service (IES) Indonesia Intergovernmental Support Office Iraq IST Jamaica Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Lebanon Liberia Libya Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Malawi Mali Management and Administration Division Mauritania Mexico Moldova Montserrat Mozambique Multi Country Office for Southern Africa (South Africa) Multi-Country Office for India, Bhutan, Maldives, and Sri Lanka Multi-Country Office for the Caribbean (Barbados) Multi-Country Office for the Maghreb (Morocco) Multi-Country Office for the Pacific (Fiji) Myanmar Nepal Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Pakistan Palestine Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Policy and Programme Bureau Policy, Programme and Intergovernmental Division Programme Division Regional Office for Americas and the Caribbean (Panama) Regional Office for Arab States (Egypt) Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (Thailand) Regional Office for East and Southern Africa (Kenya) Regional Office for Europe and Central Asia (Turkey) Regional Office for West and Central Africa (Senegal) Rwanda Samoa Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Slovakia Solomon Islands Somalia South Sudan St. Kitts-Nevis St. Lucia St. Maarten St. Vincent & the Grenadines Strategic Partnership, Civil Society, Communications and Resource Mobilization Division Strategic Partnerships Division Strategy, Planning, Resources and Effectiveness Division Sudan Suriname Tajikistan Tanzania Test Unit Thailand Timor Leste Trinidad & Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks & Caicos Islands Uganda Ukraine UN System Coordination Division UNIFEM DATA 2008-2011 UNTF to EVAW Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Vietnam Yemen Zimbabwe
Overall the evaluation findings, conclusions and recommendations are considered very useful and will inform the forthcoming Regional Office (RO) Strategic Note 2018-21 in terms of how to more effectively support the design, implementation and follow-up of Capacity Development (CD) initiatives both internally and at the level of ESA region. Partners involved in the Evaluation Reference Group (ERG) have also expressed their appreciation for the insight and learning gained from this evaluation. The RO wishes to raise a concern regarding the selection of case studies in 2016 for this evaluation. It is acknowledged that there was an extensive consultation process with Senior Management based on the principle of inclusiveness which aimed at identifying 1 case study from each thematic area. The selection criteria outlined in the evaluation TOR were the following: CD initiatives that were considered most relevant and with significant human and financial investment; Initiatives with strong learning potential; Initiatives that were well documented; and Initiatives that were on-going or closed. However, the selected 2014 and 2015 Sharefair initiatives were not designed under a CD perspective. The evaluation conclusions and recommendations should therefore not necessarily be applied to them. Another important qualification as highlighted in the evaluation report is related to the fact that the 6 selected initiatives are very diverse in terms of maturity, vision and scope. While the evaluation looked at the 6 different initiatives at the same time it was not possible to undertake a stand-alone evaluation of each initiative. It is therefore challenging for the evaluation to make detailed recommendations for each initiative, or recommendations that equally apply for the 6 initiatives altogether. The added value of the evaluation must be seen in the analytical framework and Theory of Change for the design, implementation and follow-up of CD initiatives overall while taking into account the different characteristics of the selected case studies. This is considered most useful for moving forward and the management response to the evaluation recommendations below is based on this forward-looking perspective. Given the different recommendations in the evaluation are interlinked the management response takes a comprehensive approach in addressing the recommendations.
*Comments