Formative Evaluation of UNGEI

Findings and Selected Recommendations

Presentation to UNGEI GAC 14 February 2012

Objectives of the Evaluation

• Establish a base line for UNGEI to measure future results

• Establish to what extent UNGEI partnerships are achieving their intended outcomes in: – Policy and advocacy for girls’ education and

gender equality– Good practice identification and dissemination– Building strong partnerships at country level

Overall conclusions

• UNGEI has established itself as a recognized partnership, globally, and in selected regions and countries

• It has made important progress towards achieving its intended outcomes, with various degrees of success across outcome areas and regions

Overall conclusions (cont.)

• The goals for which UNGEI was established continue to be valid and important, but remaining challenges are more complex and will require a targeted and strategic advocacy agenda

• UNGEI has areas of strengths and added value which should allow it to continue to influence the girls’ education and gender equality agenda in the coming years

At country level

• UNGEI is unique in that it has left a footprint at country level – something which is often a considerable challenge for global partnerships

• At country level UNGEI partnerships with varying characteristics have been established in 33 countries

• The country partnerships have goals which mirror those of the global partnership, underscoring the relevance of UNGEI’s agenda

• Less than half of the 33 countries have an UNGEI partnership in place that meets the three criteria for determining if a partnership has been formalized

At country level (cont.)

• The degree of success in the three outcome areas of UNGEI varies across country partnerships. UNGEI could be more effective in strengthening:– Partnership management– Building capacity– Monitoring and evaluation

Regional level

• The regional UNGEI focal points have provided a valuable link between the different levels of UNGEI

• In the EAPR UNGEI has:– Strengthened coordination of regional partners– Produced high quality products– But it is not clear what influence this has had on countries in the

region • In the other regions UNGEI has not been successful in

establishing regional partnerships• In these regions UNGEI has played a very modest role in

regional policy and advocacy, and efforts have been more focused on the country level

Global level

• UNGEI has played a prominent advocacy role for girls’ education and gender equality in selected fora. However, it should sharpen its agenda to be more effective

• UNGEI has also constituted a valuable mechanism for coordination among its members, but needs to attract other constituencies/organizations

• UNGEI has produced selected recognized resources but stakeholders would like to see UNGEI play a more cutting edge/reference role

Global level (cont.)

• Areas highlighted for attention include:– Developing a sharper advocacy agenda of UNGEI– Clarifying operational decision-making between the

GAC and the Secretariat– Strengthening the technical capacity of UNGEI– Reinforcing the GAC’s understanding of the country

level– Reviewing the membership of the partnership and

strengthening institutional commitment by partners

Recommendations

Outcome 1 – At global level

At global level:• Make policy advocacy the main priority for UNGEI

future endeavors at global level• Adopt a focused agenda of policy advocacy priorities • Commission an evidence-based external study of

key priorities in policy advocacy for girls’ education and gender equality

• Establish an advisory/guidance panel on policy advocacy as part of its organizational structure

Outcome 1 – At regional and country level

At regional level:• Continue the focus on advocacy in the UNGEI-EAP

region in accordance with the revised priority agenda for UNGEI at global level

• Develop structures and outreach to influence policy dialogue and decision-making at country level

At country level:• Focus on capacity building and partnership

strengthening

Outcome 2 – At global level

• Develop a plan of priority activities and publications around good practice that is aligned with the proposed medium term agenda for UNGEI

• Review and strengthen strategies for engaging with the academic community to develop a tighter view of good practice and allow this to inform UNGEI’s priority setting and quality assurance function

• Systematically define targets and track impact of a sample of UNGEI’s publications/collaborative work

Outcome 2 – At regional and country levels

In the EAP region:• Envision a much wider and more aggressive

distribution/outreach in order to have an impact• Target the products of these studies at higher level policy events

for more effective influencing• Develop a strategy to more effectively use partner structures

and outreach for policy dialogue at country level

At the country level:• Share the findings from the lesson learning in good practices by

developing a practical guideline for country partnerships and actors to identifying, synthesizing and disseminating good practice

Outcome 3 – At global level

• Expand the capacity of the Secretariat with an additional full time staff member

• Review the membership of GAC and deliberately recruit a small number of country level members

• Put in place clear institutional directives for institutions to be involved in the GAC

• Review the TOR for UNGEI structures (GAC, Co-Chairs, Secretariat)

• Review with UNICEF whether there are mechanisms which would make it possible for the GAC to have better insight into the annual budget and expenditure for UNGEI as an input into decision-making

Outcome 3 – At regional level

• Negotiate with UNICEF that RFPs should devote a substantial portion of their time to the RFP role (> 50%)

• Develop multi-year strategic plans for the regions• Prioritize a focus on the country level, and in

particular on strengthening country partnerships• Put in place mechanisms for knowledge sharing and

dissemination between RFPs and country FPs

Outcome 3 – At country level• Undertake a study to identify strategies and mechanisms

for strengthening the existing partnerships• Develop a prioritized capacity building plan for partnerships

and members at country level• Identify specific strategies for advocating and securing

stronger national involvement and leadership in UNGEI• Conduct selected country situation analyses of the factors

determining the disparities among girls and boys• Conduct a further analysis of the funding situation and

options for funding country level partnerships• Prioritize continued work on strengthening the monitoring

and evaluation of UNGEI’s operations

What do you think?

• How well does this evaluation capture your experience of the partnership?

• What surprised or concerned you about the image the evaluation presents of UNGEI?

• What do you think are the most important messages coming from the evaluation?

• Do you agree with the overall conclusions?• How do you think we should introduce this to

the wider community?

Thank you!