JPGE Uganda Annual Consolidated Report

Consolidated Annual Report on Activities Implemented under the UN Joint

Programme “Gender Equality” (UN JP on Gender Equality) in Uganda

Report of the Administrative Agent for the period 1 January - 31 December 2012

Multi-Partner Trust Fund Office Bureau of Management

United Nations Development Programme http://mptf.undp.org

31 May 2013

PARTICIPATING ORGANIZATIONS

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)

International Labour Organization (ILO)

United Nations Capital Development Fund (UNCDF)

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)

United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)

United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN–HABITAT)

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)

United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)

United Nations Human Rights – Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (UN-OHCHR)

United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UNWOMEN)

World Health Organization (WHO)

CONTRIBUTORS

UK Department For International Development (DFID)

Table&of&Contents&EXECUTIVE SUMMARY&.....................................................................................................................................&1!PART I: ANNUAL NARRATIVE REPORT&......................................................................................................&3!List&of&Acronyms&...................................................................................................................................................................&4!1.! Purpose&...........................................................................................................................................................................&5!2.! Results&.............................................................................................................................................................................&5!3.! Description&of&delays&in&implementation,&challenges,&lessons&learned&and&best&practices&...............&8!4.! Qualitative&Assessment&.............................................................................................................................................&9!5.! Indicator&Based&Performance&Assessment&.......................................................................................................&10!6.! Other&Assessments/Evaluations&...........................................................................................................................&18!7.! Programmatic&Revisions&.........................................................................................................................................&18!8.! Resources&.....................................................................................................................................................................&18!

PART II: ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT&....................................................................................................&19!1.! Sources&and&Uses&of&Funds&......................................................................................................................................&20!2.! Contributions&..............................................................................................................................................................&21!3.! Transfer&of&Funds&.......................................................................................................................................................&22!4.! Overall&Expenditure&and&Financial&Delivery&Rates&........................................................................................&22!5.! Transparency&and&accountability&........................................................................................................................&24!

ANNEX 1 - TABLE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE DFID ANNUAL REVIEW 2011 AND ACTIONS TAKEN&.......................................................................................................................................&25!ANNEX 2 – UN WOMEN MID TERM EVALUATION REPORT&............................................................&28!

UNJP GE in Uganda

2012 Annual Report 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This 2012 Consolidated Annual Report of the Joint Programme “United Nations Joint Programming on Gender Equality” in Uganda covers the period from 1 January to 31 December 2012. This report is in fulfillment of the reporting requirements set out in the Standard Administrative Arrangement (SAA) concluded with the Department for International Development (DFID). In line with the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed by Participating Organizations, the report is consolidated based on information, data and financial statements submitted by Participating Organizations. It is neither an evaluation of the Joint Programme nor an assessment of the performance of the Participating Organizations. The United Nations Joint Programme on Gender Equality (JPGE) is a five-year programme funded with a GBP 12,927,611 million grant from the Department for International Development (DFID), under UK Aid. At the Inception Phase, in 2010, the programme had eleven Participating Organizations (PUNOs) but as a result of strategic modifications in 2011, the programme remained with only eight Participating Organizations working with local Implementing Partners (IPs) comprised of government ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs) and civil society. As of December 2012, the following results had been achieved. Through partnership and collaboration with UN Agencies, Government and CSOs the capacity of government for gender responsive planning, budgeting and programme management to directly benefit women and girls has been steadily strengthened. A pool of Gender Responsive Budget (GRB) champions is gradually growing and the Ministry of Finance Planning and Economic Development (MFPED) and Parliament of Uganda have been key strategic partners. The buy-in and embracing of the Gender and Economic Policy Management Initiative (GEPMI) by all Permanent Secretaries has availed a more holistic, mainstreamed and institutionalized opportunity to build the capacity of top government officials on gender and macro economics. As a result of engagement with Members of Parliament (MPs), capacity in GRB is slowly but gradually being developed. A number of planning, coordination, monitoring and accountability mechanisms on gender equality and women’s empowerment issues are gradually forming and getting established across various government institutions. The human resource capacity for key national and local government institutions has been strengthened particularly on aspects of gender planning, auditing, analysis and monitoring through training of staff. Preliminary progress has been made on increasing availability of gender statistics and gender disaggregated data (GDD) to inform planning at the national level. The access to legal, health and psychosocial services for sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) survivors has been improved, with three shelters in Masaka, Moroto and Mbarara being operational. Response to SGBV has improved through the increasing availability and scope of integrated services to survivors in target districts with the establishment and resourcing of the safety centers and related national institutions like the police and hospitals in the referral pathway. Over one hundred and thirteen (168) SGBV survivors have accessed services. The program has also addressed issues of SGBV prevention particularly through engagement with faith based organizations (FBOs) that have a potentially large influence on the community to address social cultural norms and practices that perpetuate GBV. As part of the ‘Go Back to School Campaign’, a total of nine hundred seven (907) girls were enrolled back to school through the promotion of an innovative approach (the Girls Education Movement GEM Clubs) which supports girls’ social and educational life and thus their retention in school.

UNJP GE in Uganda


Through the sustained engagement by civil society, the issue of gender responsive budgeting has been prioritized on government’s budget agenda and deliberations within the Budget Committee of Parliament.! There is increased collaboration and partnership among CSOs to collectively address issues of common interest that affect efforts to achieve gender equality and women empowerment. The Multi-Partner Trust Fund Office (MPTF Office) of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) serves as the Administrative Agent (AA) of the Joint Programme. The MPTF Office receives, administers and manages contributions from the Contributor, and disburses these funds to the Participating UN Organizations in accordance with the decisions of the Joint Steering Committee. The Administrative Agent receives and consolidates the Joint Programme annual reports and submits it to the Joint Steering Committee. This report is presented in two parts. Part I is the Annual Narrative Report and Part II is the Annual Financial Report.

UNJP GE in Uganda


PART I: ANNUAL NARRATIVE REPORT

Programme Title & Project Number

Country, Locality(s), Priority Area(s) / Strategic Results

• Programme Title: United Nations Joint Program on Gender Equality

• Programme Number : 00074789 • MPTF Office Project Reference Number:

00074789

Country/Region: Uganda Priority area/ strategic results: Gender Equality

Participating Organization(s)

Implementing Partners ILO,UNCDF, UNICEF,UNFPA,UN-OHCHR, UN Women, WHO, UNHCR, UNHABITAT, FAO and UNDP

• Government Counterparts: MGLSD, NPA, MFPED, UBOS, JLOS, MoES

• CSOs: UWONET, FOWODE Joint Programme Cost (USD) Programme Duration

JP Contribution from DFID (pass-through):

Approx. USD 17,725,277 (£ 12,927,611)

Overall Duration : 57 months

Agency Contribution - Start Date: 13/04/2010 Government Contribution - End Date (revised End date): 31/12/2014 Other Contributions - Operational Closure date 31/12/2014

TOTAL: Approx. USD 17,725,27711` (£ 12,927,611)

Expected Financial Closure Date 30/04/2015

Programme Assessment/Review/Mid-Term Eval. Report Submitted By Assessment/Review - if applicable Yes × No Date: Mid-Term Evaluation Report √Yes No Date: 18/03/2013

o Name: Dr. Paulina Chiwangu o Title: Resident Representative, a.i. o Participating Organization (Lead): UN WOMEN o Email address: [email protected]

UNJP GE in Uganda


List of Acronyms BFP Budget Framework Paper CBOs Community Based Organizations CEDAW Convention on Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women CSOs Civil Society Organizations DFID United Kingdom Department for International Development EOC Equal Opportunities Commission FGM Female Genital Mutilation GEM Girl’s Education Movement GEWE Gender Equality and Women Empowerment GoU Government of Uganda GRB Gender Responsive Budgeting GRG Gender Reference Group GBV Gender Based Violence GEWE Gender Equality and Women Empowerment GEPMI Gender Economic Policy Management Initiative IP Implementing Partner JLOS Justice, Law and Order Sector JPGE Joint Programming on Gender Equality LG Local Government M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MOU Memorandum of Understanding MDA Ministries, Departments and Agencies MoES Ministry of Education and Sports MGLSD Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development MFPED Ministry of Finance Planning and Economic Development MoLG Ministry of Local Government MoPS Ministry of Public Service NSGE National Strategy for Girls Education (NSGE) NPA National Planning Authority OBT Output Budget Tool OPM Office of the Prime Minister PGA Participatory Gender Audit PUNOS Participating United Nations Organizations SGBV Sexual Gender Based Violence SAA Standard Administrative Arrangements TOR Terms of Reference UBOS Uganda Bureau of Statistics UDHS Uganda Demographic Household Survey UNCT United Nations Country Team UNDAF United Nations Development Assistance Framework ULRC Uganda Law Reform Commission USD United States Dollar VHT Village Health Teams WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene

UNJP GE in Uganda


1. Purpose The United Nations Joint Programme on Gender Equality of Uganda is aligned to the national priority framework for gender equality and women empowerment as outlined in the 2007 Uganda Gender Policy, the National Development Plan and the MDG targets. The Programme Goal is, “Enhanced Gender Equality in Access to Services and Opportunities” with the following outcomes: • Outcome 1: Strengthened government capacity for gender responsive planning; budgeting and

programme management to directly benefit women and girls. • Outcome 2: Improved access to legal, health and psychosocial services by SGBV survivors • Outcome 3: Increased school participation, completion and achievement rates of girls in primary

education. • Outcome 4: Civil society has increased capacity to advocate and demand accountability from

government for delivery of gender-responsive laws, policies and budgets. •Outcome 5: UN partners deliver effective and efficient support of the Joint Programme on Gender Equality 2. Results

i. Narrative reporting on results

Outcome 1: Strengthened government capacity for gender responsive planning; budgeting and programme management to directly benefit women and girls A pool of Gender Responsive Budget (GRB) champions is gradually growing and the Ministry of Finance Planning and Economic Development (MFPED) and Parliament of Uganda have been key strategic partners. As a result of engagement with Members of Parliament (MPs), capacity in GRB is slowly but gradually being developed. Action has been taken by Parliament to ensure that gender planning and budgeting is implemented. MPs raised the issue of lack of a gender mainstreaming policy in the Ministry of Public Service and proposed the scrapping of Value Added Tax on water since such the tax has gender implications and likely to place the burden of tax more on the women and girls due to gender differences in roles and needs. A number of planning, coordination, monitoring and accountability mechanisms on gender equality and women’s empowerment issues are gradually forming and getting established across various government institutions. These include: ‘Gender Mainstreaming Guidelines in Human Resources Management,’ developed by the Ministry of Public Service and passed by Cabinet; the inclusion of gender responsive indicators in the performance evaluations of two target program sectors (Public Service, and Water and Sanitation); a draft framework for coordination of and accountability on GEWE activities by the MGLSD; a central database and a Web-based Resource Center for effective tracking and use of gender statistics at the MGLSD; establishment of a gender oriented research agenda with twelve focus areas of study; the development of gender indicators for the seven (7) target sectors aligned with their annual plans/annual sector plans. The human resource capacity for key national and local government institutions has been strengthened particularly on aspects of gender planning, auditing, analysis and monitoring through training of staff. These have included: - Fifty five (55) middle level officers from the MGLSD trained in gender analysis, gender planning and gender budgeting basing on recommendations from Participatory Gender Audit (PGA) of the Ministry; four (4) MGLSD staff and two (2) officers in NPA were certified as PGA facilitators. Thirty (30) Community Development Officers in the ten (10) target districts were trained in gender analysis, planning, budgeting and M&E; UBOS (National Accounts and UNHS) staff were trained

Narrative Reporting on Results

UNJP GE in Uganda


on time-use and data collection tools; Twenty four (24) MGLSD staff were trained in gender responsive M&E and as a result they participated in the assessment of gender and equity budgeting in the PRDP districts of Apac and Pader. Selected staff from four (4) districts, namely Lira, Gulu, Nebbi and Kitgum, were trained in data collection, particularly Gender Disaggregated Data and Information Management System. Related human resource capacity initiatives have also included the enrollment of sixteen (16) government officials for a one-year Post Graduate Diploma course in Gender and Local Economic Development at Makerere University in 2012. Fifteen (15) out of eighteen (18) officials who begun the course in 2011 graduated. A strategic advocacy meeting targeting Permanent Secretaries and other Government officials was held to secure buy-in and embracing of the Gender and Economic Policy Management Initiative (GEPMI) by these officials. This has availed a more holistic, mainstreamed and institutionalized opportunity to build the capacity of top government officials on gender and macro economics which shall be pursued in 2013.

Preliminary progress has been made towards increasing availability of gender statistics and gender disaggregated data (GDD) to inform planning at the national level. Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) has conducted a number of studies and has developed strategies/plans that will guide, inform and improve data collected in the standard national surveys to include key aspects on gender. These have included: - in the UNHS-V; Seven gender analytical sector reports drafted based on 2009/10 UNHS, 2011 UDHS and the 2010/11 Panel Survey; a User Producer Dialogue on Gender Statistics; a Time Use Survey and the incorporation of questions on time use; a Gender Statistics Development Strategy; establishment of a Gender Unit at UBOS and MoES; and a Gender Statistical Development Strategy. Two (2) ministries and one (1) government agency i.e. MoFPED, MoLG and UBOS underwent a PGA. The audit established baselines for gender mainstreaming and identified critical gaps, challenges and recommendations for addressing gender inequality issues. Outcome 2: Improved access to legal, health and psychosocial services by SGBV survivors Response to SGBV has improved through increasing availability and scope of ‘integrated services’ to survivors in target districts with the establishment and resourcing of the safety centers and the related national institutions – the police, judiciary and hospitals in the referral pathway. One hundred and sixty eight (168) SGBV survivors accessed services in the districts of Lira, Masaka, Moroto and Mbarara. The services offered included: - legal aid, psychosocial support, mediation and referrals to different services providers, including health centers and national justice institutions. Three GBV shelters (Masaka, Mbarara and Moroto) have been renovated and are ready to provide space for safe shelters to GBV survivors. In Masaka and Mbarara, the programme has strengthened coordination among critical stakeholders in GBV service provision through the establishment of GBV Stakeholder Forums. These forums that are lead by District Local Government (DLG) organize regular meetings to share information related to GBV prevention and response. The same forums have been used to strengthen capacity of duty bearers in the five (5) districts leading to a stronger referral pathway. The National Referral Hospital and the Regional Referral Hospitals in the five (5) districts have been equipped with six (6) microscopes, six (6) coloscopes and five thousand (5,000) sexual assault (rape) kits to improve the quality of medical services to GBV survivors. Capacity building for health workers has also been done through training of three hundred (300) health workers in Lira, Gulu, Mbarara, Masaka and Moroto on clinical management of SGBV.

UNJP GE in Uganda


At the national level the Ministry of Gender Labor and Social Development (MGLSD) has developed Guidelines and Standard Operational Procedures of Shelters. This document provides a framework for establishing and running GBV shelters in Uganda and will be used as a reference by the MGLSD as it plays its oversight role. The Ministry of Health (MoH) has also been able to issue a directive to all referral and district hospitals to provide GBV services to survivors as part of comprehensive medical care. The program has also addressed issues of SGBV prevention particularly through engagement with key institutions that have a potentially large influence on the community. The aim has been to change beliefs and norms that increase risk to maternal health; break the silence on GBV, promote HIV prevention among young couples and promote sexual reproductive health education. Initiatives have included: partnership with a number of FBOs, including Christian and Muslim institutions to integrate GBV and reproductive health in their institutional frameworks, mobilize communities for social norm change and strengthen referral for GBV and reproductive health services. Outcome 3: Increased school participation, completion and achievement rates of girls in primary education As a result of the ‘Go Back to School’ campaign, a total of nine hundred and seven (907) girls pupils who had dropped out of school returned in the districts of Moroto, Gulu, Kitgum, Lira, Kaabong, Nebbi, Masaka and Pallisa through the promotion of the innovative approach (the Girls Education Movement - GEM Clubs) which support girls’ retention and re-entry to schools in their social and educational life. Activities that contributed to this included: - the support of WASH related activities including: - (i) twelve (12) drainable pit latrines (of five (5) stances each) were constructed in nine primary schools and (ii) sanitation and training in menstruation management, sanitation and hygiene for girls, provision of sanitary products (made from local material to ensure sustainability) in Nebbi district; - exchange visits among the GEM clubs in Lira, Kitgum and Kaabong were conducted. Longer-term measures have focused on development of policies and conducting studies to inform planning. These include: - the finalization of the menstrual hygiene management reader which will be disseminated at national and regional levels in 2013; - the review of the National Strategy for Girls Education was supported and will be finalized in 2013; - setting of the strategic direction of the UN Girls Education Initiative (UNGEI) partnership by the Global Advisory Committee annual meeting held in Kampala in May 2012; - a study on re-entry of pregnant girls and child mothers in primary and secondary schools was disseminated to District Education Officials in 7 districts that make up the Karamoja Sub-region. Outcome 4: Civil society has increased capacity to advocate and demand accountability from government for delivery on gender responsive laws, policies and strategies. Through the sustained engagement by Civil Society, the issue of Gender responsive budgeting has been promoted, maintained and addressed on government’s budget agenda and deliberations within the Budget committee of Parliament.!The capacity of Civil Society to collectively convene, mobilize and advocate on GEWE issues is getting even stronger. Women CSOs under their umbrella organization (UWONET) organized for the national women’s week (5th-7th Oct 2012) under the theme: “United Women Can”. It brought together women to discuss topical issues on governance and democratization, women with outstanding contribution towards empowerment of women were recognized and rewarded to further evoke and strengthen GEWE activities. The coordination mechanism has been further shaped and consequently improved through the development of a strategy for coordination, monitoring and reporting on CSOs advocating for GEWE. It is planned that this strategy will inform and guide future advocacy work on

UNJP GE in Uganda


GEWE among CSOs. This ‘joint’ capacity has been also complimented by the training of personnel from fifteen (15) Civil Society Organizations on gender responsive monitoring through budget analysis. The engagement and advocacy work on pending bills like the Marriage and Divorce bill through presentation of a position paper and dialogue with MPs underscores this growing capacity among CSOs. Outcome 5: UN partners deliver effective, strategic and efficient support for gender responsive governance The coordination mechanism of the UNJPGE has greatly been strengthened, consequently improving partnerships between Government, UN Agencies, and CSOs. This has been realized through the establishment of a Core Management Team (CMT) which provides technical support and guidance on reinforcing the joint-ness of the different gender joint programmes in Uganda. A case in point was the joint planning for the joint field monitoring missions to Lira, Moroto and Mbarara that was conducted between October and November 2012 using a single one harmonized monitoring tool. This activity was the first field joint monitoring of its kind undertaken by the three joint programmes (JP GBV, JPFGM and UNJPGE).The biggest achievement was that the exercise paved way for institutionalizing the UN in Uganda ‘Delivering as One’. Under the coordination leadership and guidance of the Joint Steering Committee for JPGE, JPGBV and JPFGM, there has been increased coherence and harmonization of plans and activities. The three joint programmes were brought together to conduct one joint annual retreat which was evidence of improved coordination. The idea was supported by all implementing partners, which was a shift from a focus on individual mandates, to a shared vision in improving and promoting rights and quality of life of women and girls in Uganda. The coordination platforms have further helped to bring implementing partners together to jointly discuss and come up with harmonized positions regarding improving programme operations, implementation, management, enhancing effectiveness and efficiency of the three joint programmes. Some changes were also being realized within the UN system. UNDP volunteered to undergo a PGA and this led to refining the priority areas in gender mainstreaming and it informed the development of a tailor made capacity building plan for UNDP staff and partners that will be rolled out in 2013. The process was funded by UNDP from its core funding.

3. Description of delays in implementation, challenges, lessons learned and best practices The funds for 2012 were disbursed on the 1st of August 2012 and transferred by the MPTF Office to the PUNOs based on the SC allocations decision in September 2012. There were some delays in internal funds disbursement. This contributed to delays in implementation of some activities by some agencies. Other challenges include: (ii) the lengthy government procurement processes that hampered timely delivery and (iii) shortfalls in full-time personnel to coordinate the implementation of planned activities at partner level. There were also limitations with respect to results reporting. All agencies and implementing partners reported in isolation, limiting their potential to capture results from a synthesis of reports from various partners and agencies under a given outcome group. Related, it emerged from the December 2012 Retreat of the three joint programmes that there is limited partner capacity of tracking and reporting performance against outcomes and targets. While an M&E framework is in place, its use by IPs is not clear and will have to be strengthened. Monitoring tools will have to be reviewed and their use encouraged. Outcome groups need to be encouraged to prioritize joint planning and reporting as part of their quarterly meetings.

UNJP GE in Uganda


Specific programme challenges under Outcome 1 and Output 1.4 are that the program design did not take into consideration the routine programme of UBOS and therefore mainstreaming of gender in some activities will not be comprehensively done as expected. For example, for the Uganda Demographic and Household Survey (UDHS) and the Population Housing Census Questionnaire, the pre-enumeration processes were not systematically engendered. Lessons Learned Strong leadership by outcome is critical to assure a shift from individual agency priorities tied to activity budget lines, to accountability on ‘Delivering-as-One’. Whereas implementing partners are supposed to be contributing to the same outcomes with similar activities, there is more need for improved synergy. Timely availability of gender statistics in order to strengthen government institutions, systems and procedures to strengthen gender equitable protection of rights and service delivery by UBOS is essential. Further it is imperative that there are structured mechanisms of ensuring interaction between UBOS and potential users of gender statistics, for effective demand and use of the statistics. The lack of such an institutional arrangement to regularly and strategically bring together the producer (UBOS) and users (ministries, departments and agencies) of the data is a major constraint to effective contribution by UBOS to the outcome. This is a generic problem for almost all statistics and partly a problem of the design of the joint program that gave very little emphasis to enhancing data use. There is need for continuous review and training of PUNOs and IPs on Results Based Management (RBM), especially Results Based Reporting. To this end, the programme has developed a capacity building strategy that will address this concern, to compliment the short training on results reporting that was conducted for PUNOs and IPs in December 2012.

4. Qualitative Assessment Because the JPGE was designed on the heels of the 2010-2014 UNDAF, leveraging the UNDAF development process, and the fact that the programme priorities are closely aligned to the national priorities of the National Development Plan, Uganda Gender Policy, CEDAW and UN Security Council Resolutions 1325 and 1820, moving forward, the programme stands to inform the next UNDAF development process based on lessons learned. Because the programme strategically engages Government MDAs, UN Agencies and CSOs, each bringing on board institutional expertise and resources, this has facilitated ownership as per the Paris Declaration Principle. The JPGE management and coordination structures have facilitated forums for monitoring and decision making. For example, the 2012 annual retreat provided a good opportunity to reflect, share lessons and strengthen cohesion and coherence.

UNJP GE in Uganda


5. Indicator Based Performance Assessment

Indicator Achieved Indicator Targets Reasons for Variance with Planned Target

Source of Verification

OUTCOME 1: Strengthened government capacity for gender responsive planning; budgeting and programme management to directly benefit women and girls. Indicator 1.1: An increase in budget allocations in the seven sectors (Health , Agriculture, Water and Sanitation, Public Service, Education, Environment, JLOS) and the 10 districts on specific strategies/activities that address the needs of women. Baseline: Zero Target: Increase in budget allocation for priority gender issues in priority sectors

Members of Parliamentary Budget Committee advocated for an increase in the allocation of funds to the Ministry of Health (MoH) and all reproductive health services - Government agreed to give the MoH additional Ushs. 49.5 billion as a result of the influence of the Budget Committee.

• Parliament Hansard.

• MFPED Documents.

Output 1.1: MGLSD has enhanced capacity to provide strategic leadership and coordination for gender mainstreaming across government Indicator 1.1.1: Ministry of Gender has adequate technical capability to coordinate implementation of gender equality and women’s empowerment (GEWE) Baseline: MGLSD has limited technical capacity to effectively fulfill its coordination mandate (Source JPGE PRODOC, 2009 page 15 -16 and MGLSD Participatory Gender Audit Report) Target 1: Staff Capacity Building Plan based on a needs assessment finalized Target 2: Gender responsive M&E framework developed Target 3: Guidelines/ technical papers for gender responsive planning, implementation and reporting developed.

• A capacity building plan is in place, and 55 middle level officers were trained in gender analysis, gender planning and gender budgeting based on recommendations from MGLSD Participatory Gender Audit.

• A gender responsive M&E framework for coordination and accountability developed and discussed with ministries departments and agencies (MDAs) including: Public Service, Local Government, OPM, Finance, Agriculture, Health, NPA, Education, and JLOS.

• Guidelines for mainstreaming gender in human resource management were disseminated by MGLSD.

MGLSD records.

Indicator 1.1.2: MGLSD has established and operationalized mechanisms to engage relevant ministries, departments and agencies) for on-going review/reflection on more gender responsive national development strategies, sectoral plans and budgets Baseline: Gender responsive indicators in the performance evaluation of programme sectors, annual sector plans and the evaluation of individual officers not institutionalized; Gender responsiveness not appraised in government officials’ performance Target 1: Gender responsive indicators included in the performance evaluation of two target programme sectors Target 2:MGLSD and MoPS agree on one performance indicator and pilot it during the 2012 Performance Appraisal of three sectors and five

• The Water and Sanitation sectors included gender responsive indicators as one of the 10 golden indicators

• MGLSD and MoPS agreed on one performance indicator for gender mainstreaming in human resource management and piloted it the districts of Nebbi, Kitgum, Gulu, Lira, Kween and Pallisa.

• Gender Disaggregated Data on staffing was compiled for MoPS and MGLSD

• Guidelines on gender audit were disseminated in six districts of Gulu. Lira, Nebbi, Kitgum, Kween and Pallisa

Performance appraisal of the three sectors and five districts was not done due to delays in accessing the necessary data base to compile gender disaggregated data on staffing

• Meeting minutes for agreeing on one performance indicator.

• MGLSD 2012 performance report

UNJP GE in Uganda




districts • Guidelines were drafted for mainstreaming gender in plans and policies

Indicator 1.1.3 MGLSD has established monitoring and reporting mechanisms and tools to assess progress on implementation of regional and international commitments on gender equality Baseline: There is no standard framework/mechanism in place for reporting on and monitoring the implementation of CEDAW. (Source: CEDAW Report a/57/38/2002) recommendations 157 – 158 on pg.170) Target: MGLSD submits 2012 Interim Report to CEDAW Committee on time and reports progress on at least two (2) recommendations.

• Interim Reports to CEDAW drafted and ready but not submitted.

• First (1st) parliamentary council staff training in Gender Responsive legal drafting was conducted

Failure to submit reports was due to delays in validation

• Draft 2013 Interim Reports to CEDAW committee

• Training report

Output 1.2: Priority issues to promote GEWE identified and addressed in sectoral plans, budgets and programme implementation in seven (7) sectors Indicator: 1.2.1: Number of target sectors that mainstream gender in plans, budgets and in programme implementation. Baseline: Priority gender issues not identified in sector plans and issues (Source: MGLSD); No Gender and Economics Policy Management Training available for government agencies; Some provisions in the current legal framework are not compliant with Uganda's human rights obligations under CEDAW, UNSCR 1325, 1820, Goma Declaration and the Maputo Protocol). Target 1: Seven (7) sectors with support of NPA develop gender indicators in line with annual work plans reviewed. Target 2: Key actors in Government of Uganda embrace GEPMI. Target 3: A pool of GEPMI experts/trainers created.

• The seven (7) priority sectors developed gender responsive indicators to monitor gender and women empowerment

• A high policy dialogue held with Permanent Secretaries reaffirmed need for more training on GEPMI targeting policy issues.

• Gender responsive indicators were dev eloped • No progress on target 3

The GPMI training was deferred to 2013

• Draft Gender Mainstreaming Report for (7) sectors.

• Meeting minutes for the higher policy dialogue

• Gender responsive indicator document

Indicator 1.2.3. Progressive improvement in the compliance of Uganda's legal framework to human rights obligations under CEDAW, UNSCR 1325,1820, Goma Declaration, and the Maputo Protocol Target 4: One (1) draft legislation before Parliament incorporates 50% recommendations to increase human rights compliance and gender equality, Target 5: One piece of draft legislation that is not human rights compliant dropped.

In line with CEDAW recommendations MGLSD has trained EOC members and technical staff in alternative complaints resolution mechanism to specifically enable girls and women to access justice

UNJP GE in Uganda




Output 1.3: Local government institutions have strengthened capacity in gender responsive planning and budgeting in 10 districts Indicator 1.3.1: Number of district local government (10 priority districts) which have adequate technical capability to mainstream gender in plans and budgets. Baseline: Gender is not mainstreamed in district plans and budgets [Source: Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development] Target: 20% of priority gender issues indicated in LG plans and budgets for 10 districts.

In Lira, Gulu, Nebbi and Kitgum districts through mentoring exercises gender issues were identified and strategies to address them included in the District Development Plans. A trial run for revised gender indicators done Sixteen civil servants working at local government level graduated with a postgraduate diploma in local economic development.

District Development Plans for Lira, Gulu, Nebbi and Kitgum MGLSD annual assessment and monitoring reports

Output 1.4: National Statistical systems collect, analyse and disseminate reliable gender disaggregated data (GDD) Indicator 1.4.1: Percentage (%) of UBOS reports (surveys, censuses, poverty maps) that include gender analysis. Baseline: None Target 1: UBOS staff and seven (7) sectors trained on gender statistics Target 2: Gender statistics and analysis of sector issues published and disseminated Target 3: Gender trend analysis for at least (3) Uganda National Household Surveys completed.

• UBOS Gender Statistics Committee and Sector (Health, Education, Agriculture, Energy and Mineral Development, Lands and Housing and Urban Development, Water, Finance and Gender) staff trained

• A list of planned surveys has been compiled and shared with users to predict availability.

• Seven (7) gender analytical sector reports were drafted based on the 2009/10 UNHS, 2011 UDHS, and the 2010/11 Panel survey. Education and Gender, Health and Gender, Energy and Gender, Water, sanitation and Gender, Local Government and Gender, JLOS and Gender, Agriculture and Gender, Gender and Social Development

• A workshop held to review UNHS 1, 11,111,1V to inform the trend of time use statistics.

The UNHS is still ongoing

Indicator 1.4.2: Number of districts with district gender profiles used in local planning. Baseline: Districts do not have gender profiles. Target 1: District gender profile outline developed. Target 2: At least four districts produce and use their gender profile in local planning.

• A concept note and report outline was developed following a monitoring exercise undertaken in 10 Higher Local Governments.

• All 10 districts produced and use their gender profile in local planning A draft gender profile report for 7 sectors in place.

A concept note in place District Profiles Gender Profile Report was submitted

Indicator 1.4.3: Availability of gender disaggregated data on time-use • Time-use surveys outline and Gender Statistics Training report on

UNJP GE in Uganda




Baseline: No GDD on time use. Target 1: Time-use survey outline available. Target 2: Data collection on time use have been incorporated as one of UBOS regular activities. Target 3: National accounts and UNHS staff trained on time-use and data time-use gathering tools.

Development Strategy produced by a Gender Specialist for Uganda.

• Questions on time use have been incorporated in the UNHS-V, An in-depth analysis of existing data on time use done, gaps in available data identified.

• The concept note on time use incorporates time use survey on evaluation activities thereby institutionalizing time use.

National Account

OUTCOME 2: Improved access to legal, health and psychosocial services by SGBV survivors Indicator 2.1. Number of SGBV survivors accessing and reporting integrated prevention and response services by the end of 2012. Baseline: Zero Target: SGBV survivors accessing and reporting to integrated services by the end of 2012.

One hundred and sixty eight (168) SGBV survivors accessed and received integrated services in Lira, Masaka, Moroto and Mbarara districts.

Annual reports from the established GBV shelters

Indicator 2.2. % of GBV case disposal rate through the justice system in five target districts. Baseline: Masaka 4.7%; Mbarara 9.5%; National average – 3.8% Target: 10 % increase in GBV case disposal rate from 2011.

Data not yet captured

Output 2.1: Availability of improved legal, health and psychosocial services for SGBV survivors Indicator 2.1.1: Number of integrated SGBV prevention and response services functional. Baseline: None Target 1: Two (2) integrated SGBV prevention and response services fully functional. Target 2: Phase 1 of forensic laboratories in all 5 districts. Target 3: Forensic Lab equipped in 2012 with basic lab minimum requirements. Target 4: 20% of medical staff trained.

• Three (3) integrated SGBV prevention and response centers were fully functional by August 2012.

• Forensic laboratories in 5 districts namely: Lira, Gulu, Mbarara, Masaka and Moroto equipped with Six colposcopes, six microscopes, and 5000 rape-kits

• Three hundred (300) health workers were trained in 5 districts (Lira, Gulu, Mbarara, Masaka and Moroto) on SGBV including the medico-legal component

• GBV Center Service Reports.

• Report on consultative meeting held at national and district level, justifying provision of integrated services

• Delivery reports for laboratory equipment

• Training Report for Medical Staff.

Indicator 2.1.2: Number of Health Units providing integrated Number of cases not yet established.

UNJP GE in Uganda




reproductive health and GBV services in target districts. Baseline: None Target: 20% increase from 2011 as base year. Indicator 2.1.3 Number of service providers’ in five target districts with strengthened capacity in SGBV case management. Baseline: 0% Target: At least 2 medical staff in from each of the target districts are trained on SGBV management.

Three hundred (300) Health workers in Masaka and Mbarara districts trained on clinical management of SGBV survivors.

Training Report for Health Workers.

Indicator 2.1.4: SGBV survivor and witness protection mechanisms compliant with international human rights standards and best practices. Baseline: Legislative and policy framework in relation to witness protection does not comply with international human rights and GEWE standards; There is no specific law dealing with witness protection. Target: HR compliant Witness Protection Bill tabled in parliament. JLOS capacity analysis in relation to witness protection completed and action plan for witness protection programme developed.

Plan for witness protection programme developed & verified by JLOS

OUTCOME 3: Increased school participation, completion and achievement rates of girls in primary education Indicator 3.1: Completion rates of girls in primary education in the 10 districts. Baseline: 52% Target: 58%

Gulu(64%); Kitgum(47%); Moroto(14%); Kaabong(7%); Masaka(88%); Mbarara(78%); Paliisa(69%); Lira(63%); Nebbi(30%); Kween(112%)1

Delayed submission of Education annual statistical abstract report from the MoES

Indicator 3.2: Transition rates of girls from Primary to Secondary increased in the 10 districts. Baseline: 63% for girls Target: 81% for girls

District data (2012) on transition rates is not yet available. It will be available in August 2013.

Delayed submission of Education annual statistical abstract report from the MoES

Output 3.1: Enhanced school policies and practices promote gender-fair education. Indicator 3.1.1: Pupil/Stance ratio for the target 10 districts. Baseline: 37:1 Target: 33:1

Nebbi (30), Lira 45) Kaabong (8), Masaka (44), Kween (8) Pallisa (37), Gulu (66), Kitgum (37) Moroto (13), Mbarara (32)

• Nine other districts not yet reached with sanitation facilities. Despite being critical to girls retention in schools, the activity has only been done in Nebbi district due to the high cost of latrine

• ( Source: Uganda Educational Statistical Abstract)

• Education Sports Sector Annual Report financial year

1 These are 2011 statistics. 2012 statistics will be released in August 2013.

UNJP GE in Uganda




construction and hand washing facilities that can only cover 9 schools in one district each year with current funding

2011/June2012 • Report on

Nebbi District – Pupil – stance ratio as a practice that promotes gender fair education.

Indicator 3.1.2: Percentage of target districts / schools with gender policies and mechanisms including a policy on violence against children in school. Baseline: TBC Target 1: 10 % increase from the baseline. Target 2: Finalize study on violence against children in school.

• Gender policies have been developed and disseminated in schools in the 10 target districts (National Strategy for Girls’ Education, UN Girls Education Initiative evaluation, Uganda Girls Education Program and Girls Education Movement).

• The Violence against children study has been drafted and will be finalized in 2013.

Dissemination to 8 project districts will be done this year.

Dissemination report in place.

OUTCOME 4: Civil society has increased capacity to advocate and demand accountability from government for delivery on gender responsive laws, policies and strategies. Indicator 4.1: Capacity among CSOs advocating for gender responsive monitoring through budget analysis / audit. Baseline: Zero. Target: CSOs monitor the gender responsiveness of budgets through budget analysis / audit.

FOWODE is actively involved in budget monitoring/analysis. Personnel from another 15 CSOs have been trained and it is expected that more will be involved in the future. 100 CBOs/women groups have been equipped with skills in monitoring LC planning and budgeting processes.

Indicator 4.2: Coordination among CSOs advocating for GEWE under the JPGE enhanced. Baseline: Low level of coordination among CSOs; There is no strategy for coordination, monitoring and reporting on CSOs advocating for GEWE under the JPGE. Target: Strategy for coordination, monitoring and reporting on CSOs advocating for GEWE under the JPGE developed and implemented.

Coordination Strategy of CSO advocating for GEWE was developed.

Records with UN WOMEN

Output 4.1: Civil society has increased capacity for gender responsive monitoring through gender budget audits / analysis.

UNJP GE in Uganda




Indicator 4.1.1: Number of CSOs that have capacity for gender responsive monitoring through budget analysis/audit. Baseline: Only one NGO – Forum for Women in Democracy (FOWODE) is working on Gender Responsive Budgeting and conducts gender budget reviews. Target 1: A pool of 15 CSO GEPM trainers created. Target 2: A listserve on gender and macroeconomics. Target 3: One journal on gender and macroeconomics published. Target 4: GEPMI Internship Program.

• Personnel from 15 CSOs were trained on gender responsive monitoring through budget analysis. This group forms the pool of GEPMI trainers.

• A listserve in place and copies have been printed. • Interns for GEPMI identified and recruited.

•Publication of journals not done due to late disbursement of funds.

Output 4.2: CSO has capacity to lobby/ advocate on GEWE Indicator 4.2.1: Capacity among CSOs advocating for GEWE enhanced. Baseline: Low capacity of CSOs in advocating for GEWE. Target: Capacity enhancement materials developed.

An assessment was done and training manuals developed for GEWE advocacy in local languages.

Indicator 4.2.2: CSO position on the selected gender bills clarified and disseminated. Baseline: Zero Target 1: Wide dissemination of the position papers among CSOs at national and district level. Target 2: CSO policy dialogues in liaison with UWOPA and held with: Women Parliamentarians; The Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee, and the Attorney General on the Marriage and Divorce Bill. Target 3: CSO recommendations integrated in the Marriage and Divorce Bill.

• Position Paper on the Marriage and Divorce Bill disseminated in 4 different workshops ( One (1) national and three ( 3) district workshops) each targeting 50 people

• A two-day retreat held with Parliamentarians on the Marriage and Divorce Bill. The amendments and strategies to accelerate advocacy for passage of the Bill into law are in place.

OUTCOME 5: UN partners deliver effective, strategic and efficient support for gender-responsive governance. Indicator 5.1: Percentage (%) of UN partners jointly supporting the priority gender interventions of government Baseline: 11 out of 20 UN agencies are signatories to the JP on Gender Equality; UN agencies have separate MoUs with GoU agencies in common programme areas Target: Coordinated programmes among UN agencies and partners at the district level

The UN agencies are expected to fund or fundraise for the activities.

Indicator 5.2: Percentage (%) of funds from total budgets allocated by UN agencies to gender related actions

Output 5.1: UN agency capacities on gender mainstreaming enhanced 5.1.1 Ratio of in-country UN agencies reporting gender equality results on at least one of their key performance criteria for each agency portfolio.

UNJP GE in Uganda




Baseline: Target: UN Agencies report on the implementation of gender audit recommendations 5.1.2 Ratio of UN agencies implementing a gender mainstreaming action plan as a result of the gender audits Baseline: Zero Target 1: 3 out of 20 UN agencies have trained gender focal points and gender mainstreaming strategies in place Target 2: UN Agencies develop strategies and work plans to implement the findings of the gender audit.

Output 5.2: Strengthened capacity of the UN System in Uganda to deliver-as-one for gender equality and women’s empowerment 5.2.1 Joint UN projects on GEWE (beyond the JP) within PUNOs. Baseline: UN agencies have parallel programmes on gender with GoU agencies. Target: Bi-annual meetings.

• Coordination mechanism has been strengthened between government, UN Agencies and CSO. A Core Management Team has been established to provide technical support and guidelines to joint-ness of the different programs.

• The first Joint Steering Committee meeting of the three JPs (UNJPGE, UNJPGBV, and JP FGM) was held in December 2012.

• Core Management Team Minutes. Joint Steering Committee Minutes.

• Joint Retreat Report

• Joint Monitoring Mission Report.

• Financial and Narrative Progress Reports.

• Joint Steering Committee meeting report available.

5.2.2 Ratio of PUNOs using joint reporting systems to report on GEWE. Baseline: Zero. Target 1: UN Team advisory to Joint SC (JPGE, GBV and FGM). Target 2: Mid-term review of the JP Gender completed.

• The joint reporting system on GEWE and the ‘UN Team advisory to Joint SC’ are not yet established.

• The Mid-term review of the UNJPGE was conducted and a draft report has been submitted.

UNJP GE in Uganda


6. Other Assessments/Evaluations The 2011 Annual Review was conducted from January 16th to 27th 2012 by two independent consultants commissioned by DFID. The main purpose of the review was to assess the progress of the programme since the 2010 review and to measure the achievement of outputs/outcomes against performance indicators and targets as indicated in the JPGE Results Matrix. The overall conclusion from the review was that considerable progress was made in 2011. The review was based on document review and interviews with stakeholders and key informants. The report was validated and distributed to key stakeholders during the 1st quarter of 2012. The recommendations have in most aspects been addressed by responsible actors (See attached summary of the recommendations as annex 1). The Joint Programme on Gender Equality Mid-Term Review process started in November 2012 with the recruitment of two consultants (an International and a National). By the time of reporting, the exercise had been concluded and the draft report disseminated (see attached annex 2).

7. Programmatic Revisions • An amendment to the Standard Letter of Agreement between UN Women and MGLSD

extended the duration of the period of implementation from 1st April 2012 to June 30, 2013 to incorporate the 2012 funding.

• A new Project Cooperation Agreement with Forum for Women in Democracy (FOWODE) was signed in August to end on June 30, 2013. This was to incorporate the 2012 funding which was received at the end of August 2012.

• The Project Cooperation Agreement with Uganda Women’s Network (UWONET) was amended with a cost extension to incorporate the 2012 funding. The Current Agreement ends on June 30, 2013.

• An amendment to the Standard Letter of Agreement between UN Women and National Planning Authority (NPA) extended the duration of the period of implementation to June 30, 2013.

• Standard Letter of Agreement between UN Women and MFPED was also amended in September 2012 to incorporate funding for 2012.

• A Project Cooperation Agreement was signed with War Child Canada in September 2012 to work under outcome 2 to provide legal aid services to GBV survivors. The agreement end on March 31, 2013. 8. Resources

The funding for the financial year 2012 (80%) was received from DFID in August 2012 and disbursed accordingly to the PUNO. A formal request has been sent to DFID requesting them to release the balance (20%) from 2012 and 50% of the 2013 funding.

UNJP GE in Uganda


PART II: ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT

UNJP GE in Uganda


2012 ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT

This chapter presents financial data2 and analysis of the Joint Programme funds as of 31 December 2012. Financial information is also available on the MPTF Office GATEWAY, at the following address: http://mptf.undp.org/factsheet/fund/JUG10.

1. Sources and Uses of Funds As of 31 December 2012, the Department for International Development (DFID) deposited US$ 12,309,150 and US$ 31,538 was earned in interest, bringing the cumulative source of funds to US$ 12,340,688. Of this amount, US$ 12,186,812 was transferred to eleven Participating Organizations of which US$ 8,044,607 was reported as expenditure. The Administrative Agent (AA) fee was charged at the approved rate of 1% on deposits and amounted to US$ 123,092. Table 1.1 provides an overview of the overall sources, uses, and balance of the Joint Programme funds as of 31 December 2012.

Table 1.1. Financial Overview (in US Dollars)

Prior Years Current Year

TOTAL as of 31-Dec-11 Jan-Dec 2012

Sources of Funds Gross Contributions 8,677,726 3,631,424 12,309,150 Fund Earned Interest and Investment Income 17,831 429 18,259 Interest Income received from Participating Organizations 9,985 3,294 13,279 Refunds by Administrative Agent to Contributors - - - Other Revenues - - -

Total: Sources of Funds 8,705,542 3,635,147 12,340,688 Uses of Funds Transfer to Participating Organizations 8,589,455 3,597,357 12,186,812 Refunds received from Participating Organizations (42,800) - (42,800)

Net Funded Amount to Participating Organizations 8,546,655 3,597,357 12,144,012 Administrative Agent Fees 86,777 36,314 123,092 Direct Costs (Steering Committee, Secretariat…) - - - Bank Charges 6 3 9 Other Expenditures - - -

Total: Uses of Funds 8,633,438 3,633,674 12,267,112 Balance of Funds Available with Administrative Agent 72,103 1,472 73,576 Net Funded Amount to Participating Organizations 8,546,655 3,597,357 12,144,012 Participating Organizations’ Expenditure 4,250,068 3,794,539 8,044,607 Balance of Funds with Participating Organizations 4,296,587 (197,182) 4,099,405

2 Due to rounding, total in the tables may not add up.

UNJP GE in Uganda


Interest income is earned in two ways: 1) on the balance of funds held by the Administrative Agent (‘Fund earned interest’), and 2) on the balance of funds held by the Participating Organisations (‘Agency earned interest’) where their Financial Regulations and Rules do not prohibit the return of interest. As of 31 December 2012, Fund earned interest amounted to US$ 18,259 and interest received from Participating Organizations (UNDP and UN WOMEN) amounted to US$ 13,279, bringing the cumulative interest received to US$ 31,538. Details are shown in the table below.

Table 1.2. Sources of Interest and Investment Income (in US dollars)

Prior Years as of 31-Dec-11

Current Year Jan-Dec 2012 TOTAL

Administrative Agent Fund Earned Interest and Investment Income 17,831 429 18,259

Total: Fund Earned Interest and Investment Income 17,831 429 18,259 Participating Organization (PO) Earned Interest Income FAO - - - ILO - - - OHCHR - - - UNDCDF - - - UNDP 5,464 3,294 8,757 UNFPA - - - UNHABITAT - - - UNHCR - - - UNICEF - - - UN WOMEN 4,521 - 4,521 WHO - - -

Total: Interest Income received from PO 9,985 3,294 13,279 Total 27,815 3,722 31,538

2. Contributions Table 2 provides information on cumulative contributions received as of 31 December 2012.

Table 2. Contributions (in US dollars)

Contributor Prior Years Current Year

TOTAL as of 31-Dec-11 Jan-Dec 2012

Department for International Development (DFID) 8,677,726 3,631,424 12,309,150

Total 8,677,726 3,631,424 12,309,150

UNJP GE in Uganda


3. Transfer of Funds Allocations to the JP Participating Organizations are approved by the Joint Steering Committee and disbursed by the Administrative Agent (AA). The AA transferred US$ 12,186,812 to eleven Participating Organizations (FAO, ILO, OHCHR, UNCDF, UNDP, UNFPA, UN-HABITAT, UNHCR, UNICEF, UN WOMEN and WHO) as of 31 December 2012. Table 3 provides information on the cumulative amount transferred to each Participating Organization and received refunds. The term “Net funded amount” refers to funds transferred to a Participating Organization less any unspent balances returned by the Participating Organization to the AA. Table 3. Transfers by Participating Organization (in US dollars)

Participating Organization

Prior Years Current Year TOTAL

as of 31 Dec 2011 Jan-Dec 2012

Transfers Refunds Net

Funded Amount


Funded Amount


Funded Amount

FAO 240,750 - 240,750 - - - 240,750 - 240,750 ILO 205,440 - 205,440 8,560 - 8,560 214,000 - 214,000 OHCHR 240,750 - 240,750 94,160 - 94,160 334,910 - 334,910 UNCDF 208,650 - 208,650 214,000 - 214,000 422,650 - 422,650 UNDP 623,841 - 623,841 15,408 - 15,408 639,249 - 639,249 UNFPA 1,644,380 - 1,644,380 926,024 - 926,024 2,570,404 - 2,570,404 UNHABITAT 74,900 - 74,900 - - - 74,900 - 74,900 UNHCR 8,230 - 8,230 - - - 8,230 - 8,230 UNICEF 830,534 - 830,534 449,400 - 449,400 1,279,934 - 1,279,934 UN WOMEN 3,828,250 (42,800) 3,785,450 1,461,805 - 1,461,805 5,290,055 (42,800) 5,247,255 WHO 683,730 - 683,730 428,000 - 428,000 1,111,730 - 1,111,730

Total 8,589,455

(42,800)

8,546,655

3,597,357

-

3,597,357

12,186,812

(42,800)

12,144,012

4. Overall Expenditure and Financial Delivery Rates All expenditures reported for the year 2012 were submitted by the Headquarters’ of the Participating Organizations via the MPTF Office Reporting Portal. These were consolidated by the MPTF Office.

4.1. Expenditure Reported by Participating Organization

As shown in table 4.1, cumulative net funded amount was US$ 12,144,012 and cumulative expenditures amount reported by the Participating Organizations was US$ 8,044,607. This equates to a reported delivery rate of 66%. The delivery rate by Participating Organization varied from 48% to 100%. Two Participating Organizations (UN-HABITAT and UNHCR) reported 100% delivery rate.

UNJP GE in Uganda


Table 4.1. Cumulative Expenditure of Participating Organizations and Financial Delivery Rate (in US dollars)

Participating Organization

Total Net Funded Amount

as of 31 Dec 2012

Total Expenditure as of 31 Dec 2012

Delivery Rate Percentage

FAO 240,750 239,532 99.49

ILO 214,000 193,636 90.48

OHCHR 334,910 214,531 64.06

UNCDF 422,650 201,240 47.61

UNDP 639,249 576,426 90.17

UNFPA 2,570,404 1,999,726 77.80

UNHABITAT 74,900 74,900 100.00

UNHCR 8,230 8,230 100.00

UNICEF 1,279,934 978,361 76.44

UN WOMEN 5,247,255 2,963,444 56.48

WHO 1,111,730 594,581 53.48

Total 12,144,012 8,044,607 66.24

4.2. Total Expenditure Reported by Category

Project expenditures are incurred and monitored by each Participating Organization and are reported as per the agreed upon categories for harmonized inter-agency reporting. In 2006 the UN Development Group (UNDG) set six categories against which UN entities must report project expenditures. Effective 1 January 2012, the UN Chief Executive Board modified these categories as a result of IPSAS adoption to comprise eight categories. The old and new categories are noted below. 2012 CEB Expense Categories 2006 UNDG Expense Categories 1. Staff and personnel costs 1. Supplies 2. Supplies, commodities and materials 2. Personnel 3. Equipment, vehicles, furniture and depreciation 3. Training 4. Contractual services 4. Contracts 5. Travel 5. Other direct costs 6. Transfer and grants 6. Indirect costs 7. General operating expenses 8. Indirect costs

UNJP GE in Uganda


Table 4.2 presents expenditure as of 31 December 2012. All expenditures reported up to 31 December 2011 are presented in the old six categories, and all expenditures reported from 1 January 2012 are presented in the new eight categories. In 2012, the highest expenditure was reported on General operating with an amount of US$ 1,104,840 followed by Travel with an amount of US$ 702,410 and Staff and personnel costs with an amount of US$ 553,766. Indirect support costs exceed the 7% range due to the fact that some agencies charged indirect support costs up-front. Table 4.2. Total Expenditure by Category (in US dollars)

Category

Expenditure Percentage of Total

Programme Cost

Prior Years as of Current Year TOTAL 31-Dec-11 Jan-Dec 2012

Supplies, Commodities, Equipment and Transport (Old) 254,517 - 254,517 3.46

Personnel (Old) 1,101,611 - 1,101,611 14.98 Training of Counterparts (Old) 578,290 - 578,290 7.86 Contracts (Old) 1,713,644 - 1,713,644 23.30 Other direct costs (Old) 55,226 - 55,226 0.75 Staff & Personnel Cost (New) - 553,766 553,766 7.53 Suppl, Comm, Materials (New) - 205,018 205,018 2.79 Equip, Veh, Furn, Depn (New) - 202,371 202,371 2.75 Contractual Services (New) - 383,930 383,930 5.22 Travel (New) - 702,410 702,410 9.55 Transfers and Grants(New) - 498,752 498,752 6.78 General Operating (New) - 1,104,840 1,104,840 15.02 Programme Costs Total 3,703,288 3,651,086 7,354,375 100.00 Indirect Support Costs Total 546,780 143,452 690,232 9.39 Total 4,250,068 3,794,539 8,044,607

5. Transparency and accountability The MPTF Office continued to provide information on its GATEWAY (http://mptf.undp.org) a knowledge platform providing real-time data, with a maximum two-hour refresh, on financial information from the MPTF Office accounting system on contributions, programme budgets and transfers to Participating Organizations. All narrative reports are published on the MPTF Office GATEWAY which provides easy access to nearly 9,600 relevant reports and documents, with tools and tables displaying financial and programme data. By providing easy access to the growing number of progress reports and related documents uploaded by users in the field, it facilitates knowledge sharing and management among UN Organizations. It is designed to provide transparent, accountable fund-management services to the UN system to enhance its coherence, effectiveness and efficiency. The MPTF Office GATEWAY has been recognized as a ‘standard setter’ by peers and partners.

UNJP GE in Uganda


ANNEX 1 - TABLE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE DFID ANNUAL REVIEW 2011 AND ACTIONS TAKEN !

RECOMMENDATIONS! ISSUES!TO!ADDRESS! ACTION!TAKEN!R.1.$Address$Systemic$Challenges$

1) Bottlenecks in UN Procedures

UN$Women$had$a$meeting$with$the$UN$Resident$Coordinator$who$promised$to$look$into$the$possibility$of$streamlining$the$UN$procedures$for$all$Joint$Programmes!

2) Late disbursement of funds

The$UN$Resident$Coordinator$contacted$the$relevant$stakeholders$to$address$the$challenge$of$late$disbursement$of$funds.$$The$discussion$took$place$between$the$then$Resident$Coordinator$and$the$Acting$UN$Women$Representative.$!

3) Under-spent funds

The$budget$spend$has$improved.!

4) Human Resource Constraints All$positions$were$filled$as$discussed$(National$Programme$Officer,$a$full$time$International$Coordinator$at$P4$Level,$UNFPA$full$time$JPGE$coordinator$for$outcome$2).$

R.2.$$Increase/strengthen$$Steering$Committee$oversight$$

1) Programme Accountability on delivery rate

• The$average$JPGE$delivery$rate$by$end$of$April$was$79%.$OHCR$will$reach$the$70%$target$by$30$June$2012.$UN$Habitat$has$concluded$a$CPA$with$Uganda$Police$Force$and$hopes$to$achieve$a$50%$budget$spend$by$30$June$2012.$

• A$detailed$account$for$each$implementing$partner$indicating$the$partners$for$each$UN$Agency$and$budget$lines$was$requested$for$purposes$of$transparency.$

2) Monitoring of attention to risks The$process$of$reviewing$actual$and$perceived$risks$related$to$implementing$the$JPGE$commenced$at$programme$outcome$level$(Outcome$2$and$4)$and$mitigation$strategies$were$discussed.$$

3) Clear Coordination and Management plan

• All$implementing$partners$are$required$to$fill$and$submit$a$FACE$Form$with$expenditures$on$agreed$activities$clearly$reflected.$

• It$was$noted$that$there$are$no$clear$guidelines$for$accountability$under$the$JPGE.$

4) Reporting on key milestones

•In$reporting$progress,$demonstrating$how$activities$being$implemented$are$contributing$to$the$results$of$the$JPGE$is$important.$

UNJP GE in Uganda


5) Development of programme strategies Strategies were developed:

• JPGE implementation guidelines

• Capacity building strategy

• Civil Society coordination Strategy (Draft)

R.3.$UN$Women$Coordination$&$Management$Plan$

1) Strategy on Role of CSOs in consultation with all stakeholders

• UWONET$did$not$succeed$in$developing$the$CSO$strategy$however,$UN$Women$took$it$up$and$there$is$a$CSO$coordination$strategy$$in$place$(draft).$

2) Define approach to Capacity Building showing knowledge transfer mechanisms and sustainability strategy.

• Capacity$building$Strategy$in$place$

3) Train/orient TAs on Capacity building

approach (above).

As$part$of$the$capacity$building$strategy$gender$mainstreaming$$training$was$conducted$for$some$key$stakeholders,$some$including$TA$

4) Streamline Mandate areas & comparative advantage for UN Agencies & National Partners

• The Ministry of Gender has developed a draft National Gender coordination mechanism

• The Institutional assessment exercise is under way at the Ministry of Gender

• The MGLSD in partnership with UN is also in the process of undertaking the mapping exercise of all stakeholders implementing gender related activities.

5) Clarify Guidelines for implementation of the JPGE on key challenge areas

•Implementation$guidelines$were$developed$!$

6) Start preparations for MTE and Evaluation (budget allocation, tracking benefits, data & evidence collection)

• The Mid-Term Review was completed and the final report is attached.

R.4.$Budget$Tracking$by$Agencies,$RG$$&$Steering$

1) Maintain annual disbursements and complement annual financial reporting with

• Financial$reporting$is$undertaken$on$a$quarterly$basis;$however$there$are$monthly$financial$updates.$$

UNJP GE in Uganda


Committee$ quarterly indicative financial reports to SC • DFID$is$normalizing$funds$disbursement$for$instance$for$2013$50%$percent$$has$been$disbursed$to$MPTF$and$the$remaining$20%$from$2012$

R5$Increase$JPGE$dedicated$staffing$at$UN$Women$

1) Assess and propose to RG & SC how the coordination budget can be fully utilised through additional staff to UNJPGE at UN Women to meet critical programme management needs

• Discussed,$under$R.1:!4)$$

R.6.Address$HR$challenges$for$Outcome$2$on$GBV$and$Output$1.4$on$Statistics$

1) Recruit Staff to coordinate outcome 2 outputs at UNFPA

2) Re-allocate part of Coordination Budget to staff costs for Outcome 2

• Discussed$under$R.1:!4)$$

R.$7.$Revise$the$DFID$$UNJPGE$Log$frame$

1) Harmonise DFID Log frame with JPGE Results Matrix.

• The$DFID$Log$frame$has$been$aligned$to$the$JPGE$Results$Matrix$

R.$8.$Align$Annual$Reviews$$ 1) Time DFID Annual Review towards (or at) the end of Annual Work plan Period

• The$timing$of$DFID$annual$review$has$been$adjusted.$$$

R.$9.$Tracking$Value$for$Money$

1) Clarify DFID expectations and provide guidance on meeting requirements for achieving and tracking Value for Money within the JPGE

• DFID$is$getting$guidance$from$HQ$on$tracking$value$for$money.$$• Value$for$money$needs$to$be$jointly$agreed$and$tracking$value$for$

money$is$a$twoewayeprocess$• DFID to share the value for money guidance paper (DFID)

R10$Timely$implementation$of$recommendations$

1) DFID to negotiate with the UN on timely implementation of annual review recommendations

• Most of the recommendations have been implemented based on the discussions between DFID and the UN.

$$

UNJP GE in Uganda


!!!!!!!

ANNEX 2 – UN WOMEN MID TERM EVALUATION REPORT

May 7, 2013

MID TERM EVALUATION REPORT

CAROLINE CHIKOORE BSC, MBA - TEAM LEADER SIMON OPOLOT MSC,PG, DIP, BA - NATIONAL CONSULTANT

UN WOMEN

UN JOINT PROGRAMME ON GENDER EQUALITY (UNJPGE) -UGANDA

Page 2 of 68

Table of Contents

Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2

Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4

Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6

1. Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7

Summary of Findings ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 7

Lessons ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 11

Recommendations ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 12

2. Background and Programme Description .................................................................................................................................................................. 14

2.1 Purpose of the Mid-Term Evaluation ......................................................................................................................................................................... 14

2.2 Objectives ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 15

3. Methodology and Review Process ............................................................................................................................................................................. 15

3.1 Approaches .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 15

3.2 Data Collection .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 16

5.2 Sampling .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 17

3.4 Data Analysis ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 18

3.5 Limitations ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 19

4. Evaluation Findings ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 19

4.1. Relevance and Strategic Fit ................................................................................................................................................................................ 19

4.2. Validity of Design (Intervention Logic Analysis)................................................................................................................................................. 20

4.2.1. Outcomes ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 20

4.2.2. Theory of Change as of December 2012 ........................................................................................................................................................... 22

4.2.3. Results Matrix ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 23

5. Efficiency ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 24

5.1. Human Resources ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 24

5.2. Financial Resources ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 26

5.3. Human Rights &Gender Equality Constraints .................................................................................................................................................... 28

6. Effectiveness ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 28

Outcome 1: Strengthened Government Capacity for Gender Responsive Planning, Budgeting and Programme Management to Directly Benefit Women and Girls. .................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 28

Outcome 2: Improved Access to Legal, Health, and Psychosocial Services by SGBV Survivors .......................................................................................... 31

Outcome 3: Increased Completion Rates of Girls in Primary Education .............................................................................................................................. 34

Outcome 4: Civil Society has Increased Capacity to Advocate and Demand Accountability from Government for GEWE .............................................. 35

7. Sustainability ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 36

8. Coherence ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 37

9. Management and Coordination ................................................................................................................................................................................. 39

5 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 40

6 Lessons ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 42

7 Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 43

Page 3 of 68

8 Annexes ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 45

Annex 1 Outcome Analysis......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 45

Annex 2 Evaluation Matrix ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 47

Annex 3 Evaluation Questions ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 52

Annex 4 Documents Reviewed .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 55

Annex 5 List of Person Interviewed ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 56

Annex 6 Inception Meeting Participants January 8, 2013 ........................................................................................................................................................ 58

Annex 7 List of Participants Debriefing/Validation Meeting March 1, 2013 ........................................................................................................................... 58

Annex 8 Terms of Reference ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 61

Figure 1 UNJPGE Theory of Change ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 22

Figure 2 Results Matrix Response .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 23

Figure 3 UNJPGE Outcome Level Funds Allocation 2011-2014 ............................................................................................................................................... 26

Figure 4 Budget Expenditure Analysis 2012.............................................................................................................................................................................. 27

Figure 5: MIFUMI Shelter Mbarara ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 32

Figure 6 GEM Club ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 34

Figure 7 CSO Advocacy ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 35

Table 1: Sampled Stakeholders .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 16

Table 2 Score Criteria ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 18

Table 3 Summary of Changes at Outcome Level ...................................................................................................................................................................... 21

Table 4 Budget Allocations 2011-2014 ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 26

Table 5 Risk Assessment ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 28

Table 6 Outcome 1 Progress Summary ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 31


Table 8 Outcome 5 Progress ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 35


Table 10 Coherence Analysis ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 37

Table 11 Approaches Compliance ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 38

Page 4 of 68

Acronyms CEDAW CBOs CoU CSOs CSW DFID DVA EM FAWE FBOs FDGs FGM FOWODE GBV GEM GEPMI GWED-G GRB GoU IP JLOS MAAIF MDAs

Convention for Elimination of Discrimination Against Women Community Based Organizations Church of Uganda Civil Society Organizations Commission on the Status of Women Department for International Development Domestic and Violence Act Evaluation Matrix Forum for African Women Educationalists Faith Based Organizations Focus Group Discussions Female Genital Mutilation Forum for Women In Democracy Gender Based Violence Girls Education Movement Gender and Economic Policy Management Initiative Gulu Women's Economic Development & Globalization Gender Responsive Budgeting Government of Uganda Implementing Partner Justice Law and Order Sector Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (Government) Ministries, Departments and Agencies

MFPED MoGLSD MoH MoLG MoJCA MoES MSC MPTF MTE MWE NPA NDP NGO PF3 PUNO HRBA RBM RM

Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development Ministry of Health Ministry of Local Government Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs Ministry of Education and Sports Most Significant Change Multi-Partner Trust Fund Mid Term Evaluation Ministry of Water and Environment National Planning Authority National Development Plan Non-Governmental Organization Police Form 3 Participating United Nations Organizations Human Rights Based Approach Results Based Management Results Matrix

Page 5 of 68

SGBV ToC ToR UBOS ULRC UN UNCDF

Sexual and Gender Based Violence Theory of Change Terms of Reference Uganda Bureau of Statistics Uganda Law Reform Commission United Nations United Nations Capital Development Fund

UNDAF UNDP UNEG UNFEM UNFPA UNICEF

United Nations Development Assistance Framework United Nations Development Programme United Nations Evaluation Group United Nations Development Fund for Women United Nations Population Fund United Nations Children’s Fund

UNJPGE UN Women UWONET WHO

United Nations Joint Programme on Gender Equality United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and Empowerment of Women Uganda Women Network World Health Organization

Page 6 of 68

Acknowledgements

The report was the work of two independent evaluators contracted by UN Women on behalf of the Steering Committee of the UNJPGE in Uganda. The evaluation was led by the Team Leader; Caroline Chikoore a Canadian based International Consultant with support from Uganda based National Consultant Simon Opolot. The team would like to thank the Participating UN Organizations of Uganda; Government Ministries, Departments and Agencies; CSOs and CBOs who participated in the evaluation exercise.

Special thanks to the UN Women Team; Paulina Chiwangu Resident Representative a.i, Judy Kamanyi Consultant, Apolo Kyeyune M&E Manager, Thaddeus Sserukeera UNJPGE M&E Officer, Agnes Kisembo National Programme Officer UNJPGE, Sandra Huesser Gender & Economic Programme Officer, Brian Mwinamura Finance Officer UNJPGE; and Janani Loum, Communication Officer Gulu for their part in facilitating the process.

The evaluation team would like to acknowledge the role of the i) Reference Group in the design of tools and stakeholder mapping and ii) the participants of the Validation Meeting held on March 1st 2013 for their critical input into the evaluation findings.

Page 7 of 68

1. Executive Summary 1.1 The report provides an independent assessment of

the UN Joint Programme on Gender Equality (UNJPGE). The programme brings together eight (8) participating UN Agencies, Government Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs), and CSOs. The 5 year joint programme (2010-2014) is implemented in ten districts in Uganda, namely, Gulu, Lira, Nebbi, Masaka, Mbarara, Pallisa, Moroto, Kween, Kaabong, and Kitgum. The total budget of £12,927,611 pounds sterling/ USD $ 16,295,051 is funded by the British Department for International Development (DFID) through the Multi-Partner Trust Fund Office (MPTF Office) of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) as the Administrative Agent.

1.2 The MTE responds to evaluation questions of relevance and strategic fit, validity of design, efficiency, effectiveness, sustainability, coherence, management and coordination in line with the PUNO terms of reference.

1.3 The evaluation methodology was informed by UNEG principles ensuring inclusion of all categories of stakeholders including UN Agencies, Government MDAs, CSOs, Donors and Communities. Participatory methods were employed with stakeholder engagement forums at the Inception Meeting where participants took part in the stakeholder mapping and approval of the methodology and tools to be used and, secondly, at the Validation Meeting that drew participants from PUNO and IPs who contributed significantly to triangulation of findings given the lack of memory of the programme design processes as a result of staff changes.

1.4 Mixed methods were used in data analysis with systems approaches used to understand the design, objectives and strategies and Theory of Change (ToC) was used to understand causal links in the results chain.

1.5 A scoring criteria was used to rate performance against each evaluation criteria and, in cases of efficiency and effectiveness, against key themes within the criteria with an aggregate allocated for the overall criteria as follows:

A Very strong with negligible weaknesses B Strong with minor weaknesses C Strong with major weaknesses D Fair with major weaknesses E Marginal with serious deficiencies

Summary of Findings Relevance and Strategic Fit

Score C

1.6 The evaluation noted the programme is relevant to the needs of women and girls.Its priorities are closely aligned to the national priorities of the National Development Plan (NDP) and Uganda Gender Policy, international priorities CEDAW, 1325 and 1820, and UNDAF.

1.7 The partnerships with Government, CSOs and UN Agencies brought wide cross sections of skills and expertise, relevant to the programme priorities.

1.8 Challenges were noted with the Intervention Logic which poses risk to measurement of impact at the end of the programme. At the outset the UNJPGE was designed against the backdrop of UNDAF, leveraging the information generated by the development process. No baseline study was conducted for the programme which instead leveraged the agency specific baseline studies, vulnerability assessments and situational assessments. Without a UNJPGE specific baseline study, reliance on secondary data limited availability of baseline data based on programme variable of inclusive of sex and geographic in the 10 districts which affected subsequent tracking and reporting.

1.9 While analysis of the ToC revealed overlaps with related UN Joint Programmes on FGM and GBV, the programme does not provide those linkages clearly in the documentation nor does it leverage the synergies between the 3.

1.10 Given the geographic outlook, the programme failed to assess the situation of women and girls at district level or to identify the most vulnerable districts of the 100 in Uganda. Instead, design was based on locations where UN Agencies and IPs had operations complementing efforts already on the ground. Although the situational assessment identified the main gender problems in the country, there was no analysis to understand the determinants of gender related problems which significantly limited the advocacy strategies and prevention initiatives across the programme given its focus on the human rights of women.

1.11 The frequent changes of the outcomes and outputs made over the past 3 years were not

Page 8 of 68

consistent with well conceived results framework nor a stable programming environment but rather a strategy more prevalent in volatile and unstable environment. The RBM framework had a number of changes made to the outcomes which were not consistently carried through at output and indicator level. The UNJPGE will need to address consistent changes for alignment of outcome, output, and indicators. Performance measurement is currently a drawback for the programme noted in IPs reporting. 15 respondents closely involved with reporting provided the following assessment of indicators: 60% felt indicators were relevant; 80% felt they were not easy to understand; 70% expressed concern with reliability; 75% were concerned with utility; 60% were concerned with measurability. The evaluation concluded this was influenced by inconsistency within the logical framework and clearly the indicators do not fully serve the needs of the IPs.

Efficiency

Score B:

Individual scores were allocated for the 3 themes discussed under efficiency as follows; 1.12 Human Resources score A - PUNOs and IPs were

efficient in the provision of human resources to lead the initiatives. With the transition from UNIFEM to UN Women, the Coordinating Agency implemented turnaround strategy that provided full staff complement with skills in programme, finance, M&E and an Interim RR able to provide leadership to the UNJPGE.UNFPA recruited a Gender expert as the focal person for UNJPGE, and other participating UN Agencies committed human resources as either Outcome Leads or Participants to each of the Outcome areas.

1.13 Extensive effort was made by the Government MDAs, with appointment of focal persons across the 7 sectors1 who are leading gender mainstreaming. Establishment of Gender Units in MoES and UBOS; appointment of gender focal persons in MoH and recruitment of national and international gender experts to support selected MDAs. Anecdotal

1Education, Health, Local Government, Public Service, JLOS, Agriculture and Water, and Environment

evidence of improved reporting on gender indicators and quick turnaround time in service delivery were reported as a result of training of the gender experts.However, challenges were noted with the need for support from decision makers to assist the technocrats in making changes that have far reaching impact. The programme leveraged CSO institutional competences, capacities and expertise in the implementation of agency specific projects. Challenges were noted with high demand for GBV services that surpasses the HR capacities of CSOs i.e. NGOs and CBOs operating at community level.

1.14 Financial Management score C - The UNJPGE exhibited strong performance operating within budget as of January 2013 budget and expenditure analysis. The programme faces major weaknesses, most of them historical, that need to be addressed to reduce credibility risk. These include timely transfer of funds to IPs, biannual disbursement plan that acknowledges the individual utilization rates of each agency and rewards IPs that are compliant with the 75% disbursement requirement, and systems that consolidate gains at outcome level through funds redistribution within the same outcome area in cases of low utilization of funds by IPs to promote realization of outcome goals

1.15 Constraints affecting efficiency. A score was provided for each risk given performance by PUNO and IPs addressing the following risks, i.e., Political risks score C, limited evidence of coordinated advocacy to address messaging of shortcomings at policy implementation level; Bureaucracy risks score C, limited evidence of PUNO strategies in addressing slow transfer processes within UN and Government systems that lead to delays; Operational risks score B, evidence of PUNO taking steps to address reporting deadlines and reporting quality standards, even though more effort is required to promote result based reporting and Social risks score B, evidence of UNJPGE addressing cultural barriers, attitudes of decision making through training and gender awareness raising.

Effectiveness

Outcome 1-Score B

1.16 MoGLSD capacities were enhanced through support from OHCHR which resulted in up to date CEDAW reporting and participation of government

Page 9 of 68

delegates in the 56th and 57th CSW meetings. However the planned multi-sectoral frameworks for monitoring and reporting of national, regional, and international commitments will need to be established to ensure sustainability.

1.17 The programme was effective in Participatory Gender Audits of seven (7) MDAs, i.e., MoGLSD, MoES, MFPED, MoLG, UBOS, JLOS and NPA which led to institutional building to address gaps identified.

1.18 Key steps were in development of GRB capacities with Gender Equality Assessments in 7 sectors with the outputs to be used for dialogue with MFPED on GRB. The evaluation noted efforts by legislatures to revoke the value added tax in favour of women and the Budget Call Circular by MFPED re-enforcing compliance with GRB Strategy. While these were small steps, they provided evidence of GRB prioritization by policy makers and the UNJPGE will need to continue advocacy for commitment to be followed through with implementation.

1.19 UNJPGE successfully supported the piloting of the Local Economic Development Post-Graduate Diploma Course at Makerere University offered to local government staff to build capacity. An indicator for sustainability was noted with handover of the course to Makerere and plans to scale up to the public. It was noted government would need to commit its resources to fund staff in district offices to take the course.

1.20 While UBOS plays a critical role in providing gender statistics, its effectiveness can be enhanced with elevation of the one person Gender Unit under the Director’s office to influence decision making within the office. UBOS will also need to address the issue of human resource needs to support the unit.

Outcome 2 -Score A:

1.21 Innovative partnerships in GBV prevention were noted between UNFPA and FBOs who have wider reach to targeted population. While contradictions exist between conservative religious views and human rights, the partnership breaks one of the barriers to realization of rights of women: religious beliefs. Closer monitoring will be needed to measure the impact of this approach. Other prevention initiatives include WHO working with MoH in provision of emergency contraception for prevention of unwanted pregnancy resulting from rape.

1.22 The programme was effective in offering an integrated approach that links legal, health, safety and psychosocial services. Various stakeholders led to the provision of services including i) WHO and MoH providing forensic equipment and supplies which has contributed to linkages between pathology and forensic medicine in handling SGBV; ii) UNFPA working with MIFUMI and Actionaid in the establishment of 4 centres that provide legal, psychosocial and medical services in Masaka, Mbarara, Lira and Moroto and iii) War Child Canada in the provision of free legal aid services to SBGV survivors. While challenges were noted with the referral chain between the service providers, i.e. capacity limitations of the justice, health, and police institutions in collecting evidence, prosecution of rape cases, and delays in provision of safety shelters, the programme initiatives addressed critical areas in the service delivery with close collaboration between the Outcome 2 IPs. The second phase will require replication and roll out of the good practices from this outcome to other areas under the programme.

Outcome 3 - Score B:

1.23 Government commitment was noted through establishment of structures such as the Gender Unit in MoES. Good practices were noted with a monitoring of Education initiatives performed by a Taskforce led by MoES that consisted of relevant line ministries, CSOs, and UNICEF.

1.24 UNICEF was effective in creating better school environment through construction of drainable pit latrine that are cost effective and allow reuse of the same pit after drainage, washroom for girls that enabled girls to bath in a safe place and supplies of sanitary products made from local material for sustainability.

1.25 Good practices were noted with the GEM Clubs, an innovative approach by UNICEF that led to return of over 4000 girls to school in target districts. The programme will need to address sustainability of the Clubs that recognize the support at community level. While the programme supported policy development and research that led to re-entry of pregnant girls and mothers into schools, more effort is required to understand the causes of teenage

Page 10 of 68

pregnancies to inform prevention strategies that complement the school retention strategies.

Outcome 4 - Score B:

1.26 Respondents indicated the UNJPGE created space for political dialogue and tabling of Gender Responsive Budgeting (GRB) and GEWE issues to the government’s agenda. Secondly, it offered a platform for joint advocacy by CSOs on the crosscutting issues of GEWE through GRB. Best practices were noted with FOWODE through its gender analysis of the annual budgets to understand its impact on women and men, girls and boys.

1.27 While the UNJPGE has contributed to increased capacity in gender budget analysis, there is need for joint advocacy strategies that support pre-budget advocacy with clear messaging on priority areas to complement the post-budget analysis conducted by FOWODE.

Sustainability

Score C:

1.28 While there are elements of sustainability within some of the UNJPGE initiatives, i.e., Makerere Course handover and roll out to the public; institution building and information management systems in MoGLSD; community level integrated approaches to GBV Actionaid, MIFUMI and War Child Canada, youth led GEM Club UNICEF with district level support and community ownership. There was however no evidence of a comprehensive sustainability strategy for UNJPGE nor effort to bring stakeholders together in the development of one at mid term.

1.29 The evaluation noted changes in policies and practices within some IPs with the use of gender programming approaches and tools promoted by the UNJPGE such as Gender Responsive Budgeting, Participatory Gender Audits, and Gender Mainstreaming notably within MDAs. At CSOs level, increased networking, linkages, and collaboration were observed.

Coherence Score B

1.30 Coherence was assessed at the level of management coordination structures of UNJPGE as follows; the evaluation noted high coherence at Steering Committee level, moderate coherence at Reference Group and Outcome levels, given the challenging technical issues they have to agree on. Overall synergy levels were satisfactory among the PUNO and IPs.

1.31 Evidence of common understanding and inter-linkages were noted at government level with collaboration between MOH and MoGLSD on policy development; MoGLSD and multiple MDAs inter-relationships on the coordination of gender mainstreaming and GRB implementation; and at CSO level multi-stakeholder engagement at country level with legal, health, and psychosocial service providers.

1.32 Compliance of UNJPGE with gender programming, human rights and Right Based Approaches was noted as follows: Gender programming compliance is high with extensive use of gender programming approaches such as gender statistics, Gender Responsive Budgeting, Gender Equality Assessment, and Participatory Gender Audits. Human rights compliance given the focus on access to services, the programme was stronger on provision than prevention and protection with the need to elaborate linkages with other UNJPs that have extensive prevention components and enhance protection of SBGV vulnerable survivors through the safety centres in the 10 districts. Result Based Management compliance although high with use of tools in planning, reporting and monitoring, could be enhanced by clarification of terms and training to develop a culture of results based reporting.

Management and Coordination Score A 1.33 The UNJPGE was effective in developing various

management coordination mechanisms that address overall decision making and technical programmatic issues through the Steering Committee, CMT, coordination of operational issues by the Reference Group, and outcome coordination Teams. The Reference Group successfully hosted annual reviews in 2011 and 2012 bringing together key stakeholders to review programme activities, discuss challenges and address priorities for the coming year. In 2012 it organized the first joint monitoring mission to 3 districts, which facilitated learning by 31 IPS and

Page 11 of 68

donors while addressing value for money through cost sharing and car pooling.

Lessons 1.34 Investment of time in a comprehensive baseline

study can be cost effective in the long run, rather than a programme spending many resources to correct gaps in project design. The programme could have avoided the risks posed by the design through investing at the outset of the programme in a 3 month baseline study vs. three years of corrective action.

1.35 Communication of national programme goals can help in distribution of resources, build blocks in inter government and CSO relations, and guide implementation with better understanding of the overall picture and each individual agency’s contribution to it. It is for this reason that national governments share their strategies with the nation - for all to understand what is at stake.

1.36 The mandates, powers, and authorities of the PUNO may be an obstacle for genuine realisation of outcome 5. Many lessons were offered by the numerous UNJPs implemented by UN Agencies worldwide. Success comes when individuals in coordinating roles are able to navigate the politics of individual agencies to effectively deliver the goals of ONE UN. Uganda, with 8 UNJPs, offers many lessons for the UNJPGE Coordinating Team in their achievement of Outcome 5.

1.37 The UNJPGE remained a high level programme focussed towards Kampala stakeholders. There is need to strengthen institutions in the districts through resourcing of local government institutions and institutional capacity building of CBOs. Success stories and lessons in coordination at community levels should be shared to support the role of those coordination agencies that support provision of services to GBV survivors especially on referral systems and centralized data collection to improve programme efficiencies at community level. More forums were needed to engage and capture voices of beneficiaries of the programme.

1.38 Programme visibility plays out differently at national and district levels. At national level, the programme participants engaged in the various activities and management structures can speak to the over-arching goal and outcome; the same could not be said for the district level participants. There is lack of understanding of the goals and outcomes of

the national UNJPGE. The programme is compromised by lack of visibility at all levels of operation. The programme strategy of integration is commendable; however, the programme could have avoided the information gaps by sharing the goals of the programme to enable all programme participants to have common understanding in order to facilitate better management and contribution to the overall picture.

1.39 Pilot projects and small scale interventions meant to benefit the whole country tend to remain confined to the target areas due to lack of planning for scale up. The UNJPGE implemented in 10 out of over 100 districts can facilitate the roll out of lessons and good practices from its initiatives to the rest of the country. This can only be done where IPs recognise the potential for replication and documentation of those initiatives that can be scaled up or replicated outside of the 10 districts.

1.40 The multiple stakeholder approach to SGBV creates numerous channels for survivors to access services and creates user-friendly spaces for women and children, men and boys who face human rights violations. The UNJPGE can contribute to central data collection and management through coordinated approach to reporting given the limitations in the central data collection system.

1.41 The intensified training of health workers at both national level and district level on clinical management of survivors of rape has contributed to the improved health care. It has also caused a policy consideration of developing service standards and guidelines for delivery of forensic services in health and management of SGBV cases. This training and supervision has also involved the university departments of Forensic Medicine and Obstetrics and Gynaecology as well as Mulago hospital as a national referral hospital. This initiative provides indicators of sustainability that the programme can leverage. Lessons on knowledge management have shown it goes beyond information technology, document management, and building information portals. MoGLSD has taken key steps in establishing these and it should translate into value addition through leveraging the improved human capital and strengthened institutional capability to deliver quality public service on gender in Uganda.

Page 12 of 68

Recommendations The following recommendations are made to the UNJPGE stakeholders:

The following recommendations are made to the UNJPGE stakeholders:

Relevance

Recommendation 1 Align Intervention Logic - Reference Group

Address inconsistencies in the intervention logic to enable the changes at Outcome level to be reflected consistently through the logical frame, i.e., outcomes, outputs and indicators level through revision of the Results Matrix. Engage IPs to leverage knowledge and expertise within the UNJPGE.

Provide training on RBM to improve results based reporting and move away from activity based reporting.

Efficiency

Recommendation 2 Consolidate gains at Outcome level - Steering Committee

Revise the blanket biannual rate caveat of 75% utilization rate for all partners to reward the top performers with disbursement according to plan.

In the case of low fund utilization, initiate systems that allow funds to be redirected to partners that operate and contribute to the same Outcome to consolidate gains and realization of outcome goals.

Continue efforts to address historic challenges that resulted in delayed disbursements and reporting to improve efficiencies.

Effectiveness

Recommendation 3 Multi-sectoral framework

Establish the planned multi-sectoral frameworks for monitoring and reporting of national, regional and

international commitments to strengthen national capacity and government accountabilities

Recommendation 4 Elevate Gender Unit in UBOs to Director’s Office – UN Women Outcome 1 Lead

Support positioning of UBOS within the Director’s Office for effective decision making and action on gender statistics. Introduce an internship programme for statistics university students to support UBOS Gender Unit as well as expose the students to gender statistics to build a resource team of young advocates.

Recommendation 5 Improve effectiveness of central and district government systems - Reference Group

Continue engagement of decision makers in key institutions and training on gender mainstreaming to support the technocrats who are working in the institutions to bring change on gender.

Address resourcing and capacity needs of local government institutions through creating linkages between UNJPGE initiatives at central and district levels and leverage other UNJPGEs with resources targeted at local government.

Recommendation 6 Improve effectiveness of SGBV service provision – UNFPA Outcome 2 Lead

Develop clear action points to expedite operations of the GBV Shelters, reduce the barriers that hinder reporting of GBV and rape cases, facilitate referral systems at community levels and policy advocacy on the use of PF3 to allow other professionals such as mid wives to examine cases and address capacity of JLOS institutions.

The UNJPGE to contribute to central data collection and management through coordinated approach to reporting given the limitations in the central data collection

Recommendation 7 Consolidate messaging and advocacy – Reference Group

Develop a UNJPGE communication strategy to guide messaging on over-arching goals of the UNJPGE and their contribution to the overall picture for all

Page 13 of 68

stakeholders at central and district level, guide GRB advocacy, donor communication for funding of components that have resulted from UNJPGE but lack funding, e.g. gender audit findings, and to raise awareness for potential future initiatives beyond the funding period.

Sustainability

Recommendation 8 Sustainability Strategies/ Exit Strategies– Reference Group

Develop the overarching UNJPGE sustainability guidelines to support IPs in development of individual agency exit plans and sustainability strategies providing adequate time for resourcing and integration into agency plans before the end of the UNJPGE.

Page 14 of 68

2. Background and Programme Description The UN Joint Programme on Gender Equality (UNJPGE) in Uganda seeks to “enhance gender equality in access to services and opportunities”. The programme is implemented in ten districts (Gulu, Lira, Nebbi, Masaka, Mbarara, Pallisa, Moroto, Kween, Kaabong, and Kitgum) over a 5 year period (2009-2014) with the participation of twelve (12) UN Organizations at inception and reduced to 2 eight (8) at mid-term; various Government line ministries and institutions; and national civil society organizations (CSOs). The total budget of £12,927,611 pounds sterling /USD $ 16,295,051is funded by the British Department for International Development (DFID) through the Multi-Partner Trust Fund Office (MPTF Office) of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) as the Administrative Agent. The programme offers a cohesive approach by the UN Organizations that seek:

(i) Efficiency savings in administrative costs and reduced duplication of activities in GBV and Security Sector

Reform. (ii) Enhanced capacity for Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development (MGLSD) in its mandate in

coordination, policy, and monitoring of gender equality. (iii) A joint programme coordination and management framework. (iv) Public Accountability for implementation of international and regional instruments, i.e., CEDAW, Maputo

Protocol, Convention on the Rights of a Child (CRC) and Security Council Resolutions (SCR) 1325 and 1820. (v) Mechanisms for funding and tracking CSO initiatives for gender equality.

The UNJPGE addresses significant gaps in gender equality and women’s empowerment in Uganda, in alignment with the National Development Plan (NDP) and the Uganda Gender Policy3. The programme also reinforces the goals of the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF 2010-2014). The UNJPGE contributes to 5 outcomes as of the time of the mid-term evaluation (MTE):

- Outcome 1: Strengthened government capacity for gender responsive planning, budgeting, and programme management to directly benefit women and girls.

- Outcome 2: Improved access to legal, health, and psychosocial services of SGBV survivors. - Outcome 3: Increased school participation, completion, and achievement rates of girls in primary education. - Outcome 4: Civil society has increased capacity to advocate and demand accountability from government for

delivery on gender responsive laws, policies, and strategies. - Outcome 5: UN partners deliver effective, strategic, and efficient support for gender.

2.1 Purpose of the Mid-Term Evaluation The mid-term evaluation was commissioned by UN Women Uganda, in their capacity as the UNJPGE Coordinating Agency and on behalf of the Steering Committee. It assessed progress towards achievement of outputs and

2 ILO, UNCDF, UN Women, UNICEF, UNDP, UNFPA, OHCHR and WHO

3Annual (2012) Review of the UN Joint Programme on Gender Equality – Uganda, commissioned by DFID Uganda

Page 15 of 68

outcomes at mid-term. The over-arching aim was to assess relevance of the programme and its ability to deliver intended results. The evaluation addressed questions of relevance and strategic fit, validity of design, efficiency, effectiveness, and sustainability. Assessment of coherence, management, and coordination was made to understand how well the Participating UN Organizations (PUNOs) are working in support of development partners. The findings provide necessary management and institutional measures for corrective action in the course of delivery for the remaining two years of the UNJPGE. The evaluation aimed at identifying factors that contributed to success or failure of programme implementation and good practices from which to draw lessons for replication by the programme participants identified as Government of Uganda (GoU) line ministries and institutions, CSOs, PUNOs, donors, and other stakeholders.

2.2 Objectives

The objectives of the mid-term evaluation were to:

(i) Take stock of current programme achievements, challenges, and opportunities. (ii) Verify the continued relevance (alignment with national needs) and pertinence of the programme as well as

the related sustainability of benefits thereof. (iii) Assess the programme design, objectives, strategies, and implementation arrangements in light of changes

in the program context and the risks therein. (iv) Make recommendations on how to improve performance of the programme. (v) Identify areas to which implementing partners and programme management should pay specific attention in

order to achieve programme results.

3. Methodology and Review Process

3.1 Approaches The evaluation upheld human rights and gender equality approaches in line with the UNEG principles ensuring inclusion of various categories of stakeholders, i.e., UN Agencies, CSOs, Government, donors and beneficiaries where appropriate. Participatory methods were employed through engagement of stakeholders in the stakeholder mapping at the Inception meeting held in Kampala on January 8, 2013 and the Validation meeting on March 1, 2013. Participation at both meetings included IP representatives from Government, UN Agencies, and CSOs. Fair power relations were acknowledged with non-participation of UN Women staff in stakeholder interviews.

The evaluation used mixed methods that allowed comprehensive evidence through the use of both qualitative and quantitative research methods. Theory led deductive approach, i.e., Theory of Change was used to understand the assumptions behind the outcomes of the programme as of mid-term given the various changes to the outcomes. System based approaches were used to understand the design, objectives, strategies, and implementation arrangements that support achievement of the UNJPGE outcomes.

Reliability was ensured through use of data gathering tools with open ended questions structured around the evaluation criteria defined in the terms of reference. A debrief/validation meeting was held with Programme

Page 16 of 68

participants in Kampala on March 1, 2013 where confirmation of programme history and gaps were addressed by participants.

The evaluation upheld evaluation ethics respecting participants’ right to confidentiality, avoidance of harm especially in respect to vulnerability, gender, age, and ethnicity. Translation was available into local languages to ensure participants were comfortable to contribute.

3.2 Data Collection The Consulting Team reviewed programme documents inclusive of the Joint Programme Plan, the UNJPGE Results Matrix, Donor Annual Reviews for 2010 and 2011, PUNOs and IPs quarterly and annual reports, UNJPGE AWPs, financial reports, and MOUs. The output of the detailed document review was the UNJPGE Inception Report that outlined the evaluation framework including the methodology, evaluation matrix, questions, and sampling. Semi-structured interviews were held in Kampala with PUNO head of agencies, UNJPGE focal persons, IPs including CSOs, i.e., Women’s Organizations, Church Organizations, International and National NGOs and CBOs and Government line ministries and institutions. Field trips were undertaken at district level in Gulu and Masaka where semi-structured interviews were conducted with District Officials, CBOs and NGOs involved in programme implementation.

Visits were made to legal aid, counselling and psychological facilities in Masaka and Gulu operated by MIFUMI and GWED-G respectively to understand the clients, services offered, and eligibility to the facilities,

Table 1: Sampled Stakeholders

Type of stakeholder involved in the evaluation

*sampled units interviewed

UNDP 2 UN Women 7 UNICEF 1 UNFPA 5 UNCDF 1 WHO 1 OHCHR 2 Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development*1

10

Ministry of Education and Sports*2 4 Ministry of Health 1 Ministry of Local Government 1 National Planning Authority 4 Uganda Bureau of statistics (UBOS) 2 CSOs

UWONET 2 FOWODE 1

MIFUMI 2

Action Aid 9

Page 17 of 68

Church of Uganda (CoU) 4 Uganda Catholic Secretariat 1 GWED- G 1

Donors - DFID 2

*1 - Includes District Community Development Officer In-Charge Gender interviewed in Masaka District and Gulu District Gender Officer

*2- Includes District Education Officer interviewed in Masaka District

3.3 Sampling Stakeholder mapping was conducted with participation of the UNJPGE Coordinating Team. The evaluation used purposive sampling in identification of primary project participants noted as management structures, i.e., UNCT, Steering Committee, Reference Group; coordination structures, i.e., UNJPGE Coordination Agencies -UN Women and UNDP; DFID, the programme donor; and Project beneficiaries, i.e., communities, women, men, girls and boys.

Field trips were informed by stakeholder mapping at outcome level through identification of the lead UN Agency, IPs, and location. Refer to Table 1 below.

Table 2 Outcome Sampling

Theme UN Agency IPs (Population) Sample Location Outcome 1 UN Women MoGLSD, NPA,

FOWODE,UWONET,MFPED, UBOS

MoGLSD Kampala, Pallisa, Gulu

NPA MFPED UWONET Kampala FOWODE Kampala UNCDF MoLG UNDP MoGLSD MoGLSD Kampala UNDP UNFPA UBOS UBOS Outcome 2 UNFPA CoU, SDA, Orthodox, Born

Again, Catholic, UMSC, UWONET working with(MIFUMI & Action Aid), CDFU, MoGLSD

UWONET Kampala

MIFUMI Kampala, Mbarara, Masaka

UNFPA Action Aid Lira UMSC Mbarara

Page 18 of 68

CoU Mbarara, Masaka

WHO MOH MOH Kampala, Gulu

OHCHR JLOS JLOS Kampala UNICEF MOES MOES Kampala,

Masaka, Lira Outcome 3 UNICEF MOES, FAWE, MOES Kampala UNICEF

(GEM) Gulu

FAWE Kampala Outcome 4 UN Women FOWODE, UWONET UWONET Kampala FOWODE Kampala UNCDF MOLG, UWONET UWONET Kampala UNCDF Outcome 5 UN Women UNDP CD UNCT RC

3.4 Data Analysis The evaluation used mixed methods - both qualitative and quantitative research methods to analyze the data. Qualitative data was categorised at outcome level with analysis of trends in outcomes and outputs and progress at mid-term in realization of each outcome.

Quantitative methods were used to analyze the data with tabulations and frequencies to supplement the qualitative data. Triangulation was used to confirm validity of data; reliability was ensured through use of standard data collection tools.

A scoring criteria was used to rate the performance against each criteria as follows;

Table 2 Score Criteria

Score Rating

A Very strong with negligible weaknesses

B Strong with minor weaknesses

C Strong with major weaknesses

D Fair with major weaknesses

E Marginal with serious deficiencies

Validation of evaluation findings was undertaken through a stakeholders’ debrief meeting held in Kampala on March 1, 2013and feedback was integrated in the final report.

Page 19 of 68

3.5 Limitations I. The field missions conducted in the second week of January provided challenges with availability of

respondents due to the festive season. The mitigation strategy for this was flexibility in the work plan to accommodate periods when programme participants were available for the evaluation.

II. Closure of schools due to festive season vacation provided a challenge in the inclusion of young people (girls and boys) who are beneficiaries of the programme.

III. Limitations in regard to number of respondents with full programme history (institutional memory) due to staff attrition across the UN Agencies.

4. Evaluation Findings

4.1. Relevance and Strategic Fit The UNJPGE was designed on the heels of the 2010-2014 UNDAF4 which was aligned to the National Development Plan. UNDAF influenced the design of the UNJPGE with prioritization of the north due to post conflict era; the UNJPGE therefore focussed on other provinces, i.e., Western and Central with 10 districts selected out of over 100 national districts. Initiatives were designed to complement ongoing work by UN Agencies and IPs. Selection of districts was based on participating agency baseline data, situational assessment and/or vulnerability assessment.

Several Joint Programmes were operated under UNDAF with close linkages to the UN Joint Programme on Gender Based Violence (UNJPGBV) and the UN Joint Programme on female genital mutilation (UNJPFGM), which respectively aim to (i) strengthen the capacity of the GBV actors to provide services in medical, psychosocial, security and justice in the protection of women and children from GBV and (ii) leverage social dynamics towards abandonment within selected communities that practice FGM. While the situational assessment had acknowledged the Uganda Gender Policy (1997) and its facilitation of Uganda’s gender mainstreaming programmes in all sectors of the economy through The Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP) and Sector Wide Approaches (SWAps), it had also identified gaps in implementation and meeting gender indicators. The UNJPGE was therefore relevant in addressing the gaps.

At international level, the UNJPGE is aligned to international priorities of CEDAW and UN Security Council Resolutions (UNSCR) 1325 and 1820 with programme initiatives designed to meet government compliance in reporting on progress made. The selection of stakeholders facilitated participation of Government Ministries &

4The UNDAF priorities were noted as;

UNDAF Outcome 1: Capacity of selected Government Institutions and the Civil Society improved to bring about good governance and realization of human rights that lead to reducing geographic, socio-economic and demographic disparities in attainment of Millennium Declaration and Goals by 2014.

UNDAF Outcome 2: Vulnerable segments of the population increasingly benefit from sustainable livelihoods and, in particular, improved agricultural systems and employment opportunities to cope with the population dynamics, increasing economic disparities, economic impact of HIV&AIDS, environment shocks and recovery challenges by 2014.

UNDAF Outcome 3: Vulnerable populations in Uganda, especially in the north, of Uganda increasingly benefit from sustainable and quality social services by 2014.

Page 20 of 68

Institutions, CSOs and UN Agencies bringing together broad cross sections of skills and expertise and organizational expertise and competences relevant to the programme priorities.

Overall, respondents confirmed the relevance of the programme and strategic fit to the national and international priorities of gender equality and women’s empowerment with the UNJPGE addressing national priorities through 4 thematic sectors of government: capacity, primary education, GBV and GRB at the time of the MTE. It was noted that while the priority areas had changed since inception phase with discontinuation of two thematic areas, livelihood and governance, these issues were covered under UNDAF and had in fact reduced duplication of effort.

4.2. Validity of Design (Intervention Logic Analysis) The theory of change model5 was used to analyse the desired change and the steps taken over the past 2 years of implementation. Analysis was made of the ex-ante and mid–term conditions and how the programme activities had facilitated or inhibited change. The overarching goal of the UNJPGE, noted as “Enhanced Gender Equality in Access to Services and Opportunities”, wasunderstood to drive initiatives that addressed shortcomings in service delivery in the identified outcome areas.

4.2.1. Outcomes The programme was based on an initial 6 outcome logic framework informed by the 2009 situational assessment.6It was noted that a number of changes had been made over the programme implementation period. Tracking of documents used over the period provided the changes undertaken (refer to Annex 1): Changes were noted as follows:

(i) Termination of 3 outcomes on Livelihoods, Governance, and Gender and Micro Economic Policies referred as Outcomes 1,3, and 5 respectively in the original design documentation;

(ii) Adoption of 2 new thematic areas, GRB and Primary Education, referred as Outcome 1 and 3 in 2011; (iii) Word smithing and syntax of the 5 outcomes aimed at improving clarity.

Table 3 below provides a summary of the changes and analysis of impact of the changes at outcome level.

5A theory of change takes a wide view of a desired change, carefully probing the assumptions behind each step in what may be a long and complex process. Articulating a theory of change often entails thinking through all the steps along a path toward a desired change, identifying the preconditions that will enable (and possibly inhibit) each step, listing the activities that will produce those conditions, and explaining why those activities are likely to work.- Learning for Sustainability 6Outcome 1: Central (selected sectors ) local government have strategies, systems and staff capacities to increase women’s access to sustainable livelihood and gainful employment Outcome 2: Effective policies and strategies to reduce GBV and increase women’s access to justice developed at all levels and advocacy strategies for implementation at both national and local level being implemented Outcome 3: Policies, systems, and strategies developed for citizens’ active participation in policies and decision making and accountability processes, including Parliament, political parties, local government, and community organizations that impact the advancement of gender equality Outcome 4: Strategies, plans, and capacities to reduce gender gaps in selected MDGs related progress developed by relevant government institutions and CSOs Outcome 5: National Gender machinery and key stakeholders have systems, plans, budgets and human resources in place to effectively coordinate, implement and monitor Gender and Macro Economic Policies Outcome 6: The UN System in Uganda provides comprehensive, coherent, and effective support to gender responsive programming in the country within joint programming framework

Page 21 of 68

Table 3 Summary of Changes at Outcome Level

Outcome Year 0 – 2009 (Design Phase)

Year 1 - 2010

Year 2- 2011

Year 3-2012 (MTE)

Analysis of change

Outcome 1

- Termination of livelihoods and gainful employment thematic initiatives and adoption of GRB thematic focus.

- Stakeholder focus remained government and its institutional capacity.

- The changes had impact on inputs, activities and outcomes with GRB initiatives introduced in 2011. Impact of changes high

Outcome 2 - Word smithing of GBV thematic wording to improve focus on service delivery.

- Overall impact of changes low, led to accelerated impact.

Outcome 3 - Discontinuous change with termination of citizen active participation (governance) and adoption of new outcome Primary education.

- Change in stakeholders from parliamentarians and politicians to UNICEF and MoES.

- Impact high on inputs and outcomes, yet positive in terms of new thematic focus and selection of high performing agencies under Outcome 3.

Outcome 4 - Word smithing of outcome to improve focus on CSOs advocacy.

- Low impact on inputs and outputs.

Outcome 5 - Outcome terminated.

- Low impact on planned inputs, outputs, activities and outcomes due to non performance, Funds redirected to agencies with higher capacity to utilize funds.

Outcome 6 - Word smithing of outcome to improve focus on UN System.

- Low impact on inputs and outcomes.

Key

Terminated Ongoing

Page 22 of 68

The evaluation noted change management had not been addressed in the risk assessment for the programme nor were there clear expectations on how to address it. The changes affected the inputs, activities, outputs and outcomes of the results chain which pose a risk to impact measurement of the UNJPGE initiatives.

While programme adaptation is good practice in development, high levels of change characterised by the programme are normally associated with environments that are complex and unstable either politically or economically. In Uganda, the justification provided for the change was responsiveness to the evolving social context and normative framework, i.e., reducing overlaps with UNDAF with phase out of livelihoods and governance thematic areas and the focus on GBV “service delivery”, i.e., provision complementing the prevention initiatives under the UNJPGBV. For the evaluation, the high level of change pointed to two factors (i) inadequately defined pre-operational conditions due to lack of detailed baseline study that would have informed the design of the joint programme and (ii) limitation with the use of conventional log frame based approaches that assume change is linear and controlled by the programme.

At mid-term, the UNJPGE is encouraged to define the pathways of change and anchor them in a solid theoretical frame. Approaches like Theory of Change (ToC), Outcome Mapping (OM), and Outcome Harvesting (OH) have all earned their merit in development thinking and can support the programme managers in managing change. While ToC address cause and effect and provides logical pathways and linkages in complex initiatives, Outcome Mapping is anchored in the belief that change is non linear and not controllable, as exhibited by the programme to date. What is imperative is for the programme to understand the implications of the approaches and measurability of contribution vs. attribution of the programme given the interconnections of relationships and systems within the UNJPGE.

4.2.2. Theory of Change as of December 2012 Figure 1 UNJPGE Theory of Change

UNJPGE MTE March 1, 2013

15

Enhanced Gender Equality in Access to

Services & Opportunities

Outcome 1 Strengthened

Capacity for GRB

Output 1 Leadership & coordination

Output 2 Engendered sector plans and budgets

Output 3 Local Government

Institutions GRP & B Output 4

Gender Statistics

Output 5 Gender Audit

Outcome 4 CSOs

increased capacity for

GEWE Output 1

Advocacy for GRB Output 2

Capacity for GEWE

Outcome 5 UN Partners

Deliver Effective & Efficient

support Output 1

Capacity for gender mainstreaming

Outcome 3 Increased

completion rate of girls in

primary school Output 1 School policies & practices

promote gender fair education

Outcome 2 Improved Access

to health & professional

services Output 1

Availability of improved legal, health, psychosocial

services for SGBV

Inputs: Funding Experts

Partnerships Training

Assumptions: Government commitment &

ownership CSO capacity and

engagement UN Coordination

JP GBV JP FGM

Skills Structures Systems

Integrated service Prevention/Awareness

Page 23 of 68

The ToC Model (Figure 1 above) was mapped using the current outcomes as at the time of the evaluation.

Outcome 1: Strengthened government capacity for gender responsive planning, budgeting, and programme management to directly benefit women and girls. Inputs were noted as institutional assessments through gender audits, training of staff, and technical support to government institutions. The evaluation noted linkages between 2 outcomes with the focus on Gender Responsive Budget, Outcomes 1 and 4. The UNJPGE will need to manage synergies between the 2 outcome areas and collaboration of the IPs in planning and implementation.

Mapping of Outcome 2: Improved access to legal, health, and psychosocial services of SGBV survivors revealed overlaps with 2 other UN Joint Programmes, the UNJPGBV and UNJPFGM. While the outcome has one output it was concluded the output was not sufficiently robust to cover the activities in place which included prevention initiatives with Faith Based Organizations (FBOs) as well as protection of women under the safety shelters. The UNJPGE will need to address the comprehensiveness of this outcome through robust outputs that reflect the reality. Outcome 3: Increased school participation, completion, and achievement rates of girls in primary education. Inputs for this outcome included construction material for sanitation, training on sanitation for girls, provision of sanitary products and club formation. The outcome area has a single output, i.e., enhanced school policies, practices that promote gender fair education. It was concluded the output does not fully align with all the activities under implementation.

Outcome 4: Civil society has increased capacity to advocate and demand accountability from government for delivery on gender responsive laws, policies, and strategies has 2 outputs that address capacity of CSOs to GRB through gender budgets, audits/analysis, and capacity of CSOs to lobby and advocate for Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment. Inputs include coalition and coordination of CSOs, skills building on GRB monitoring and relationship building. It was noted while the programme had discontinued the economic empowerment thematic component, outcome 4 continued to focus on GEWE; there was need for revision at output level to have alignment with the changes at outcome level.

Outcome 5: UN partners deliver effective, strategic, and efficient support for gender. Inputs included technical support, human resources, systems and financial resources. The outcome had one output; “UN agency capacities on gender mainstreaming enhanced” which did not fully address the dimension of capacity of the UN Agencies.

4.2.3. Results Matrix UNJPGE uses the results based management framework for planning, monitoring, and reporting. Monitoring of the programme is guided by the Results Matrix (RM) whose purpose is to allow UNJPGE participants to routinely monitor its gender equality programme, manage its resources and periodically report on progress towards achievement of the goal “Enhanced Gender Equality in Access to Services and Opportunities”. The RM includes indicators with baseline and target values against which performance is measured. It was noted that the RM was a cause of concern for programme participants. 15 participants responded to the question on results matrix and the responses from participants were categorised as follows;

Figure 2 Results Matrix Response

Page 24 of 68

Indicators – Respondents views

UNJPGE MTE March 1, 2013

14

60% indicators are relevant to goals

80% not easy to understand

70% not reliable

75% concerned with utility

60% concerned with measurability

It was noted targets for the index for each indicator had a baseline dated 2006 -2009; in some cases baseline data was not available. The most recent data was not always available, with targets for 4 year projections from 2011 – 2014. While targets are not expected to explain why situations have changed, they do progressively link the different levels of measurement with programme outcomes analyzed in relation to changes at programme output level. It was noted the indicators did not always correspond with the logical framework and, in some cases, outcome level indicators were not well aligned with the output level indicators nor did they show realistic progression over the years. There also seemed to be misunderstanding about the sphere of control and sphere of influence of the programme and to what extent the UNJPGE can control priorities such as budget allocation, given the milestones under Indicators 1.1 and I.3.1 in relation to the scope of the programme.7

Based on the analysis, the Results Matrix needs revision to represent the causal links between activities, outputs and outcomes. This will realign the logical frame and inform revision necessary for the results matrix.

Evaluation score – C Strong with numerous weaknesses

5. Efficiency

5.1. Human Resources Capacity of UN Agencies

7Indicator 1.1 An increase in budget allocation in seven sectors and the 10 target districts on specific strategies/activities that address the needs of women and girls;

baseline zero, 2011 -, 2012 increase in budget allocation for priority sectors; 2013 at least 3% increase in budget allocation for priority gender issues in priority sectors; 2014 at least 5% increase….

Indicator 1.3.1 Number of district local government (10 priority districts) which have adequate technical capacity to mainstream gender in plans and budgets; baseline zero, 2011 local government trained on GBR planning and monitoring; 2012 20% priority gender issues indicated in LG plans and budget of 10 districts; 2013 50%...; 2014 80%

Page 25 of 68

Uganda implements 7 Joint Programmes8 under the ONE UN framework, it was noted accountability for the UNJPGE lies within the two coordinating agencies, i.e., UNDP and UN Women and not UNCT. While UNDP’s capacity as the administrative agent had been effective, UN Women had gone through the transition from UNIFEM to UN Women during the UNJPGE implementation period. At mid-term it was noted UN Women made progress in addressing the Human Resource issues that the agency had faced since inception of the UNJPGE. The nature of contracts offered to staff was short term resulting in high attrition. This impacted on the coordination role of the agency without a substantive Resident Representative (RR) who could represent at high levels with the Minister of Gender and UNCT, provide guidance on planning, monitoring and ability to respond to IPs technical needs for the UNJPGE. Over the past year, UN Women recruited a substantive International Programme Coordinator and a Programme Specialist who lead and support the programme. The agency has also increased its staff complement and skills with a Country M&E Manager and UNJPGE M&E Officer, a Finance Officer, and a UNV with background in Economics. The team has been responding to historic challenges in terms of delays in submission of plans, address quality of reports through systems that support (i) timely submissions of plans and reports and (ii) introduction of result oriented reporting. Respondents indicated challenges with indicators defined in the Results Matrix; to improve efficiency in reporting, it is recommended that UN Women further review with the IPs. It was noted UN Women has the skills to lead this exercise internally through the Country M&E Manager. Other UN Agencies appointed focal persons to lead their outcome areas and UNFPA recruited a Gender Focal Person to increase its capacity to lead Outcome 2 and implementation of GBV, working closely with the Gender Team Leader.

Overall, UN Agencies were found to be effective in addressing capacity needs of the UNJPGE.

Capacity of Government

The programme contributed human resources to the government institutions with gender focal persons appointed to guide planning across the seven ministries (MoES, MoH, MoLG, MoPS, MoJCA, MAAIF, and MWE).9Technical experts were recruited to the Ministry of Gender (MoGLSD), National Planning Authority (NPA), and the Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS). In other institutions participating in the programme, at least one person was dedicated to the implementation of the UNJPGE, while institutions such as MoES established a Gender Unit and MoH with 3 focal persons. These additional resources have enhanced capacity among institutions to integrate gender into various sectors of service delivery.Challenges experienced included lack of power by the technocrats to influence institutional change where decision making was the domain of senior officials who were not, in some cases, gender sensitive. While the UNJPGE was formalized through the Gender and Economic Policy Management Initiative (GEPMI) in 2012 with endorsement of the Permanent Secretaries, there is need for mentoring to ensure the technocrats who are in place receive the required political support for decisions that can yield far reaching impact.

Capacity of CSOs

8Population, HIV/AIDS, Gender Equality, Peace Building, Female Genital Mutilation, Gender Based Violence and Early Recovery

Page 26 of 68

At CSOs level, overall accountability falls with the Head of Agency with one individual selected as the focal person for UNJPGE implementation. CSOs have relevant skills, experience and competence for the outcome areas with CSOs like Action Aid Uganda (AAU), MIFUMI and FOWODE playing key roles in terms of contributing to outcome goals. The programme was able to leverage the institutional competences and HR skills within the participating CSOs. While competences were noted among CSOs, constraints were reported at operational levels in the districts where numbers of skilled HR were limited in the face of demand for services from the communities serviced.

Evaluation score – A very strong with negligible weaknesses

5.2. Financial Resources Table 4 Budget Allocations 2011-2014

The evaluation assessed resource allocation for the programme over the implementation period. The UNJPGE has a budget of £12,927,611 / USD $ 16,295,051 for the 5 year period.10 Budget allocation over the programme period was projected as follows (refer to Table 4).

Outcome level funds allocation was guided by priority of the outcomes with 72% of the resources devoted to Outcome 1 and 2 initiatives given the scale and scope of the stakeholders and initiatives under implementation (refer to Figure 3 below).

Figure 3 UNJPGE Outcome Level Funds Allocation 2011-2014

10 Amendment No 1 to the Standard Administrative Agreement approved in 2011.

Year Budget £

By December 2009

2,000,000

By June 2011 3,389,114

By April 2013 2,427,469

By April 2014 2,176,761

A number of challenges most of them stemming from the programme start up were expressed by respondents which have implications on financial management: (i) The majority of IPs indicated their capacity to spend was affected by transfer delays and for others limited staff

dedicated to implementation of projects: “The Joint programme has experienced delays in disbursements from its start. As a result, when funds eventually come, programme activities are hastily implemented with work overload for staff. This, potentially, compromises programme quality.” Respondent, Mid-‐Term Evaluation of UNJPGE in Uganda. The evaluation noted the process of funds transfer was protracted with funds transferred from DFID → UNDP AA →PUNO HQ → UN Agency Country Offices →IPs. The programme faced a one year delay in start up which affected implementation of planned activities. This delayed start up has for some affected IPs ability to implement according to workplan. Steps to address the historic delays were taken with changes from quarterly to half year transfers reducing the processing time for each disbursement.

(ii) A caveat that biannual disbursements are effected at 75% usage rate for the whole programme when each outcome and each agency had different utilization rates. This requirement negatively impacts on IPs that are compliant with the benchmark. There was no provision for redirection of funds within the outcome or across outcomes to agencies that have capacity for fund utilization.

(iii) Historically outcome discontinuation was linked to low performance by IPs, the programme is recommended to identify below par performance and redirect funds to those agencies with capacity to spend within the same outcome. At this stage of programme implementation, consolidation of outcome areas is essential to achieve greater impact.

While the above have historically affected operations, analysis of budget and expenditure as of December 2012 indicated a positive picture of expenditure according to plan. Figure 4 Budget Expenditure Analysis 2012

Evaluation score - C strong with numerous weaknesses

Page 28 of 68

5.3. Human Rights &Gender Equality Constraints

The evaluation assessed constraints that affected efficiencies of PUNO and IPs in addressing human rights and gender capacity. Reported constraints were related to political, bureaucratic, operational and social factors across PUNOs and IPs. Feedback from evaluation participants was categorized as follows:

Table 5 Risk Assessment

Constraint/Risk Score Analysis

Political C Evidence of UNJPGE policy initiatives; however, lack of coordinated joint advocacy strategy to address limitations at policy level that include government implementation of HRGE policies and legislation and decision making on verbal commitments in terms of GRB.

Bureaucracy C Limited evidence of UN Agencies addressing challenges faced includes UN Agencies and Government bureaucracy that resulted in funds transfer delays; Government IPs started implementation in August 2011 due to lengthy procedures of signing LOAs and late disbursement of funds.

Operational B Evidence of PUNOs addressing planning, reporting deadlines and reporting quality standards. Lack of visibility of UNJPGE at district level compounded by lack of knowledge of overarching goals and outcomes by district level stakeholders.

Social B Evidence of UNJPGE addressing cultural barriers, attitudes of decision makers in government institutions through training.

6. Effectiveness

Outcome 1: Strengthened Government Capacity for Gender Responsive Planning, Budgeting and Programme Management to Directly Benefit Women and Girls.

The outcome seeks to strengthen the capacity of gender responsive planning and implementation, targeting the meso level institutional capacity with UN Women as the Lead Agency.

Page 29 of 68

The programme addresses the capacity of the government Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDA) through leadership of (MoGLSD) and four areas: (i) leadership and coordination, (ii) plans, budget, and implementation in seven sectors, (iii) local government capacity in gender planning and budgeting, and (iv) collection, analysis, and use of statistics.

Leadership and Coordination: OHCHR worked with MoGLSD and supported CEDAW Reporting to the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. The GoU had a history of non-reporting with 7 reports not submitted due to challenges with prioritization, resourcing, and capacity. Outputs included (i) mid-term review of CEDAW that identified limitations in reporting, (ii) 11 meetings held with MoGLSD that raised understanding of accountabilities and provided technical support in the coordination of reporting of 2 recommendations by the GoU, i.e., (a) 12 on Law Reform (b) 32 on girls education, and (iii) established linkages with police in the implementation of CEDAW, SCR 1820 and 1325 and the Goma Declaration. As a result of the UNJPGE effort, MoGLSD supported travel of government delegation to the 56th and 57th CSW meetings and the reporting. While the milestone for 2012 was met, i.e., CEDAW reporting, there was little evidence of the multi-sectoral framework for monitoring and reporting of future national, regional and international commitments to ensure sustainability.

Participatory Gender Audits (PGAs) were conducted for seven (7) MDAs inclusive of MoGLSD, MoES, UBOS, MFPED, MoLG, JLOS and NPA. The gender audits provided baseline indicators on gender planning, budgeting, skills/capacity of the MDAs which resulted into increased support through recruitment of international and local gender experts and development of Participatory Gender Audit skills within MDAs through training of 20 government officers and certification of 6 PGA Facilitators who subsequently led training of 30 staff in the Auditor General’s Office. The evaluation noted the effectiveness of skills building on PGA and the intermediate outcome of institutionalization of the PGA.

Plans and Budget Implementation:

The overall objective of UNJPGE supported GRB interventions is to achieve gender-balanced national and district budgets that address the needs of women and men, girls and boys equitably. 11Progress was noted as follows: i) Gender equality assessments in the 7 sectors which will inform dialogue on GRB between Finance Ministry and respective sector working groups, ii) GRB curriculum developed through collaborative effort of MFPED, MoGLSD, Makerere University (School of Gender and Women Studies), Uganda Institute and National Curriculum Centre which will provide standards in training.

While at MDA institutional level, the programme has contributed to institutional building on GRB, at policy level focus on GRB has resulted in i) the Budget Call Circular for 2012/2013 that reinforced the national GRB strategy reflected with increases in two UNJPGE priority sectors, i.e., education and water, ii) action taken by parliament to ensure GRB implementation through allocation of funds to MoH capacity building, maternal health and family planning services and iii) lobbying by MPs to revoke the value added tax on water, to the greater benefit of women.

11Priority areas of GRB are to:

i. influence government spending to address gender needs; ii. make more visible the contribution of women to the national economy and to make their needs central in budget debates;

iii. build expertise in reading and analysing budgets among Members of Parliament (MPs), district legislators, government planners involved in the budget process and among researchers, NGOs/CBOs and the media; and

iv. make the government more accountable to citizens and the budget process more transparent.

Page 30 of 68

The evaluation noted ownership and leadership of MoGLSD was evident through coordination of MDAs, i.e., MFPED on GRB curriculum, NPA on sector specific GR indicators, MoJCA training on GRB legislation, MoPS drafting and roll out of guidelines for HRM gender mainstreaming, GDD compilation of staff in the MDAs, MoLG revision of gender mainstreaming indicators for assessment of annual LGS performance.

While budget allocations to the seven sectors and district level still had a long way to go, it was noted there was alignment between GoU and UNJPGE priorities of value for money, improved quality of social services with focus on education and water, strengthening of the public sector management and efficient service delivery. The second phase of implementation will need continued effort to translate government political commitment into real time budget allocations at both national and district levels.

Local Government Capacity in Gender Planning and Budgeting: At local government level, the programme offered gender capacity building courses at Makerere University targeting staff in the departments of Community Development and District Commercial Office in the 10 districts and at central government level. The initiative contributed to skills building with anecdotal evidence in improved service delivery of technical support and response to requests from other line ministries and real time evidence of improved gender indicator reporting at district level. Challenges identified included(i) low number of participants per district due to limited funding for the programme and (ii) coverage of training programme which benefitted only 10 districts out of the over 100 districts in the country. To address the funding gaps, there was willingness by the government for District Offices to use their own resources, i.e., “the Capacity Building Grants” to support the initiatives. Plans were to make the course prerequisite for Gender Development Officer Position at district level. The evaluation noted benefits accrued to both women and men who held the targeted positions. However, the milestone of 20% priority gender issues indicated in plans and budget for 10 districts was not evident for 2012. The programme will need to clarify tracking of the targets/milestones.

One of the goals of the UNJPGE was to build capacity of local government where operations were largely constrained by resource limitations. However the evaluation noted the focus of the UNJPGE had been targeted at central governments with limited initiatives targeted at district level. While participants at the validation meeting confirmed the programme priority was central government, there was need to support district offices with resource mobilization and leverage other UNJPs with operations at district level to support the capacity of local government.

Collection, Analysis and Use of Statistics: The UNJPGE, through its partnership with UBOS, implements gender statistics initiative that collects and analyses disaggregated data for national planning. Outputs included (i) a Gender Strategy developed to guide mainstreaming, (ii) establishment of a gender statistics subcommittee, and (iii) review of the Ugandan National Household Questionnaire to integrate gender data. Challenges noted from respondents included limited HR and financial resources, attitude of Statisticians who lacked gender training, no definition of gender statistics to guide advocacy work, and a one person Gender Unit run by a junior Project Officer who requires management support to influence decisions within the office. The UNJPGE will need buy-in from the Director and other senior UBOS officials with the recommendation to elevate the one person Gender Unit to Director’s Office. Project participants will need to be innovative and use local resources such as Statistics University students as interns to support programme implementation. It was confirmed at the Validation Meeting that UBOS contributed to Outcome 1 even though it worked with UNFPA on other initiatives.

Page 31 of 68

Table 6 Outcome 1 Progress Summary

Partners Examples of progress towards outcomes Source Lead Agency – UN Women IPs - UN Agencies: UNCDF, UNFPA Government: MoGLSD, MFPED, MoLG, NPA, UBOS NGOs : FOWODE

(+) Gender focal person appointed in all government ministries and trained to support UNJPGE initiatives (+) Technical Gender Experts availed to Ministry of Gender (MoGLSD), National Planning Authority (NPA), and Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS), to support government technocrats in integrating gender into service delivery. (+) E-Resource Centre established, provides repository of gender statistics and information to support knowledge management in MoGLSD, i.e., reports, policies, research, plans, and inventory of gender experts. Uganda Women Magazine published bi-annually on March 8th International Women’s Day and October 9th Independence Day captures the voices of policy makers and beneficiaries – women and girls. (+) Gender Capacity building course established and running in Makerere University Kampala (MUK) – aimed at training central and local government officials. Graduates from the course already serving in the MoGLSD, other government departments, and target districts.

Interviews with UN Women, UNCDF, MoGLSD, UBOS,FOWODE& Document Review

Evaluation score –B strong with minor weaknesses

Outcome 2: Improved Access to Legal, Health, and Psychosocial Services by SGBV Survivors

The outcome sought to enhance GBV advocacy and service delivery through an integrated approach that provides linkages between legal, health, and psychosocial services with UNFPA as lead agency. Assessment was made of how the programme addresses the human rights based approach through its initiatives.

Prevention is addressed through a number of initiatives including an innovative partnership between UNFPA and a number of FBOs, including Christian and Muslim. The partnership provides a forum for discussion with institutions that are conservative and yet have strong influence on the UNJPGE target population. Good practices were noted with CoU having passed an inventive resolution committing to mobilize communities against beliefs and norms that increase risk of maternal health; break the silence on GBV violence; promote HIV prevention among young couples; promote sexual reproductive health education.12Initiatives target both women and men within the religious institutions.

The Uganda Catholic Secretariat partnership aimed to reach 40% of Christians within the country who are Catholics. While the partnership faces an obvious dilemma reconciling human rights and Christian values within the Catholic Church, e.g., recognition and appreciation of birth control and rights of women, the programme offers an

Page 32 of 68

opportunity to influence practices and beliefs. The programme had the following outputs: rapid assessment survey, dissemination of findings to stakeholders, orientation of leaders, and formation of male groups and referral forums. Key steps were taken by the initiative to introduce the issue; the next phase will need to support effective programming to have impact.

Other prevention initiatives include WHO working with MoH Regional hospitals involved in the programme. To address prevention the Post Exposure Prophylaxis under the Prevention of HIV Policy is addressed with respect to survivors of rape where the MoH supplies health units with emergency contraception for prevention of unwanted pregnancy resulting from rape. Overall, there is need by the programme to strengthen the linkages between prevention and other programme components. Figure 5: MIFUMI Shelter Mbarara

Provision of services to address human rights of women is undertaken through an integrated approach that links legal, health, and psychosocial service providers. At policy level, collaboration was noted between the Ministry of Health (MoH) and MoGLSD in policy development and implementation on SBGV. The partnership between WHO and MoH led to the procurement and provision of forensic equipment and supplies which has contributed to linkages between pathology and forensic medical work in handling SGBV for the MoH. The equipment included assault kits colonoscopies, monitors and microscopes. WHO also supported production of training material and supervision guidelines for health workers, training of 250 health workers in clinical management and survivors of rape while MoH was supported to develop service standards for forensic services in health.

Commitment by the MoH was noted with human resources, i.e., 3 staff dedicated to SBGV. Challenges in implementation were noted as insufficient resources to strengthen both prevention and service provision and limited resourcing available for MoH in building SGBV investigating skills, medical personnel for testing of survivors, implementation of new policies by medical professionals and late delivery of supplies that delayed testing.

UNFPA works with MIFUMI and Actionaid who operate at community level. Progress towards achievements was noted as) training of health workers in five districts (Gulu, Mbarara, Lira, Moroto and Masaka), ii) establishment of four (4) centres that provided legal, psychosocial services, and iii) medical services and mobilization of village health teams in Masaka and Mbarara to support health access and provision. Legal aid services are provided by War Child Canada in Northern Uganda with provision of free legal aid services to SGBV survivors. Reach of their work is provided below:

MIFUMI is a national NGO whose mandate is to protect women and children experiencing domestic violence. Statistics showed 93% reported cases were on women with an age range of 18-45. Implementation of the multi-sectoral approach to GBV is evidenced by efforts to establish referral pathway inclusive of the police, the state attorney and magistrate; the regional hospital, CSOs and DLG. While shelters structures were under renovation a number of steps were taken to ensure the rights of women were upheld through:

i) Identification of relatives or people in their social network to seek consent and willingness to provide accommodation to the survivor.

ii) Collaborate with police and LCs to ensure that the survivors are safe in the process of resettlement and after resettlement.

iii) Network with LCs to involve the community in the safety of the survivor and to pass on the awareness that GBV is bad and is against the Law.

After the resettlements, follow up visits are made to ensure the survivors are re integrated into their communities

MIFUMI Mbarara Shelter Status 2012

Page 33 of 68

50,000 community members reached through 12 public service announcements. Information provided on free legal aid services with toll free numbers used to encourage reporting and information provided on the legal aid clinics in Gulu, Kitgum and Pader town. War Child Canada, Quarter 2 Report 2012.

The evaluation noted the Safety Centre Model was designed to protect women and children who are at risk of SGBV through provision of temporary shelter refer to Figure 5. Progress was made with the drafting of the Guidelines and Procedures for the operation of shelters in Uganda by MoGLSD and the IPs in Outcome 2. The guidelines provide minimum operating standards for establishment and management of GBV shelters to benefit all districts in Uganda. It was noted there were delays in establishment of shelters in the 5 districts under the UNJPGE due to identification of partners, location, and facilities to meet requirements for the services.

The programme was effective in the use of a range of methods and channels such as the media, community dialogues, and methods inclusive of partnering with religious groups and village health teams to bring about change. At community level good practices were noted with linkages between UWONET working with GWED-G, a Gulu based CBO that receives support in the form of advocacy material, strategies, and funding for specific activities for its community GBV work.

Implementation has been supported by the drafting and adoption of Domestic and Violence Act (DVA), FGM Act and Trafficking in Persons Act, while the Sexual Offenses Bill is still being reviewed by MoJCA and ULRC, there was still need for effortsto address the use of the Penal Code under the Domestic Violence Act and revision of Police Form 3 (PF3) to allow other medical professionals such as mid-wives to examine survivors.

The evaluation noted challenges in data collection at district level due to limited capacity of police, health institutions, and District Offices. With no centralized reporting systems, agencies and hospitals collected data for their own use. Monitoring and reporting on GBV indicators is affected by limited baseline data for each district of operation and uncoordinated case handling and referral. Challenges with reporting were noted as levy for medical examination which discouraged survivors from reporting to the police or medical institutions sometimes reporting to NGOs and CBOs; requirement for medical examination by doctors resulted in delays and loss of evidence which affected confidence in the system.


Partners Examples of progress towards outcomes Source Lead Agency: UNFPA IPs UN Agencies: OHCHR, WHO Government: MoH, JLOS NGOs: UWONET, Action Aid, War Child Canada and MIFUMI, FBOs

(+) Regional Referral Hospital equipped with assault kits, colonoscopies and monitors to improve diagnostics of survivors of rape. (+) IEC material for health workers and communities procured and distributed to 5 districts (+) 4 centres established partially functional, providing legal, psychosocial, and medical (+)Forensic labs in 5 districts (Gulu, Lira, Masaka, Mbarara, and Moroto) supplied with equipment and training of lab technicians for response to SGBV (+) 250 H/W trained in hospitals in 5 districts (+)Legal aid service provided to GBV survivors by 2 agencies, MIFUMI and Action Aid

Interviews with UNFPA, WHO, MoH, UWONET, Action Aid, MIFUMI Catholic Document Review

Page 34 of 68

(+) Village health team mobilised to support integrated health services for SGBV (+) FBOs provided with training guidelines and communication material for GBV and reproductive health awareness (-) Data collection and management not coordinated at district level, resulting in under reporting and poor tracking systems

Evaluation score - A very strong with negligible weakness

Outcome 3: Increased Completion Rates of Girls in Primary Education

The outcome offers strategic partnerships between UNICEF as the lead agency working with its traditional development partners, MoES and FAWE. Government ownership was demonstrated through establishment of the Gender Unit in 2012 whose outputs included the Gender Monitoring Tool which established baselines in key educational areas and enables tracking of key indicators using a Gender Training Manual. Monitoring is done by the ministry coordination structure which is fully integrated into the ministry with participation of Ministry of Education and Sports, FAWE and UNICEF.

Figure 6 GEM Club

UNICEF implemented the Girls Education Movement (GEM) Club an innovative approach to encourage girls’ retention in schools which supported girls in their social and educational life refer to case Figure 6. UNICEF also supports gender related WASH activities with outputs of (i)drainable pit latrine construction for boys and girls in 9 schools, (ii) washrooms for girls which enabled the girls at least one bath a day in a safe environment, and (iii) sanitation and hygiene management for girls, including sanitary products made from local material to ensure sustainability. At policy level, the programme supported the drafting of the Menstrual Hygiene Management Reader, planned for dissemination in 2013 and review of the National Strategy for Girls Education to be finalized in 2013.

The programme was designed to address specific the gaps in service provisions that promote girls to stay in school. There is limited evidence on linkages with prevention models. While the PUNO and IPs are contributing to retention of girls in schools, there is need for linkages of the UNJPGE with other programmes making the effort to understand the cause of teenage pregnancies in Uganda to inform advocacy on prevention. The programme can also leverage effort under Outcome 2 on violence against children in schools even though it is acknowledged violence in schools goes beyond GBV.

The Masaka GEM Club was aligned with district girls’ education priorities. The club supported schools in the districts with monitoring attendance and income generating projects to meet club member basic needs. Chapter members were trained and received bicycles for club activities Challenges were noted as lack of funding for the club coordination role, inadequate funding for the GEM Club monitoring.

Page 35 of 68

Table 8 Outcome 5 Progress

Partners Examples of progress towards outcomes Source Lead Agency: UNICEF IPs Government: MoES NGOs : FAWE

(+)Gender Monitoring tool established baseline in specific education areas (+) Gender Training Manual (+)FAWE Uganda study on Pregnancies in Primary and Secondary Schools led to advocacy Concept Paper on re-entry of pregnant girls and child mothers to school (+) 4000 girls brought back to school as result of GEM Clubs encouraging girls to stay in school (+) WASH related activities (construction of pit latrines and training in menstruation management, sanitation and hygiene in schools)

Interviews with UNICEF,MOES& District Education Office in Masaka

Evaluation score – A very strong with negligible weaknesses

Outcome 4: Civil Society has Increased Capacity to Advocate and Demand Accountability from Government for GEWE The outcome is focussed on demanding government accountability to GE CSOs implementing GE initiatives.

Respondents indicated that the UNJPGE created space for political dialogue and tabling of GRB and GEWE issues before government refer to case Figure 7. Secondly, it offered a platform for joint advocacy by CSOs on the crosscutting issues of GEWE. The programme leveraged capacity of FOWODE on budget analysis and audits to understand the impact on women and men, girls and boys. Its evidence based advocacy was targeted at the sectors of agriculture, health, and education with evidence of improved mainstreaming of gender in their SWAps and annual Budget Framework Papers (BFPs).

Figure 7 CSO Advocacy

Respondents indicated, “While there were a few champions of the GRB in government who advocated for policy change, there was limited action taken over the 3 years to support implementation”. Challenges for CSOs were noted as (i) timely access to government budget information, (ii) ex-post budget analysis which is retrospective and does not influence government decision-making, and (iii) limited government systems and structures for promotion of GRB implementation. The CSOs and PUNOs in Outcome 4 will need to work closely with government to ensure its commitment translates to action through leveraging the relationships in Outcome 1.

To be effective, IPs will need to be proactive with pre-budget advocacy to influence budget allocations.

UWONET organized the National Women’s Week from 5th-7th Oct 2012 under the theme: “United Women Can”. This brought together women to discuss topical issues on governance and democratization including UNJPGE CSOs. Women with outstanding contribution towards empowerment of women were recognized. The event created a forum for coordination of women’s advocacy and called for strategies and innovations for taking forward the women’s movement the next 50 years.

Page 36 of 68


Partners Examples of progress towards outcomes Source Lead: UN Women IPs UN Agencies: UNCDF, UNDP NGOs: UWONET, FOWODE

(+) Monitoring of GRB by CSOs through annual budget analysis and audits. However, retrospective analysis has failed to influence government allocations. (+) Increased capacity of GRB and budget analysis to determine impact on their constituencies. (+)Training on gender budget analysis provided to local government level staff in the districts of Pallisa and Masaka.

Interviews with UN Women, UNCDF and UWONET; FOWODE& Document Review

Evaluation score – B strong with minor weaknesses

7. Sustainability

Sustainability Strategy

Although there were elements of sustainability within the UNJPGE, there was no evidence of a comprehensive sustainability strategy at mid-term. Examples were noted with Makerere University partnership. At mid–point, the university was set to adopt the Local Economic Development Post-Graduate Diploma Course and offer it as part of its on-going courses to the public. To ensure the goals of the programme are met, the government’s commitment to use its own resources for staff training will need to be followed through to ensure continued training given staff attrition. The UNJPGE contributed HR to the government institutions, i.e., MoGLSD, NPA and UBOS and focal gender persons in the seven sectors (of Education, Health, Local Government, Public Service, JLOS, Agriculture and Water and Environment) and a Gender Unit in MoES. The staff gained skills based on the on-going capacity building on gender mainstreaming and gender responsive budgeting skills which should be maintained in the next phase in response to staff changes. To address sustainability, MoGLSD will need to institutionalize the training to address frequent staff changes and continuity. Sustainability will be ensured where knowledge management systems within government support the trained individuals and encourage them to identify areas where they can make a difference and propose changes and improvement in government operations and systems.

The implementation of models like the Safety Centres Model and Integrated Approach to service delivery provides relationships and linkages between service providers that can be continued beyond the UNJPGE program period. Increased capacity of institutions through skills building and institutional strengthening provides opportunities to attract funding for potential future programmes. The introduction of youth clubs in the form of GEM with district level support and ownership was important for sustainability. Resourcing of the clubs with local resources will need to be addressed for continuity of activities beyond UNJPGE funding period.

By partnering with CSOs, the joint programme was able to leverage gender expertise available among them. IPs, such as Uganda Women Network (UWONET) and Forum for Women in Democracy (FOWODE), have long-standing

Page 37 of 68

experience in addressing gender issues. Good practices were noted in the linkages between UWONET and CBOs where support was provided in terms of advocacy material, messaging on key issues, and technical and financial support in addressing gender issues in their communities. While funding may be limited, the relationship can be continued beyond the programme period. The programme facilitated coordination and networking of CSOs under umbrella organizations like UWONET that has the coordination mandate. This ensures continuity of such activities beyond the programme implementation period.

Stakeholders Involvement in Sustainability Strategy

At the time of MTE there was little evidence of collective stakeholder engagement in the development of sustainability strategy. Coordinated approaches will be needed to address this in the next phase.

Degrees IPs are changing policies and practices on gender

Assessment was made to what degree partners were changing policies and practices on GE. Government level policy changes and gender responsive practices contributed by the UNJPGE were noted with (i) use of gender programming tools and approaches such as GRB, PGA, GM evident within the MDAs; ii) increased level of linkage, collaboration and networking within the UNJPGE IPs and their implementation networks and replication of multi-stakeholder approach at community level.

Evaluation score C strong with numerous weaknesses

8. Coherence The evaluation assessed coherence in terms of the degree to which the partners are working towards the same results with common understanding of inter-relations at 3 levels of the coordination structures.

Uganda has a total of 7 joint programmes (UNJPs) with two or more UN Agencies collaborating on the planning and implementation between 11 resident and 9 non-resident UN Agencies. Effort was made by the UN Agencies for greater collaboration between the 3 UNJPs that were closely related, i.e., Gender Equality, GBV, and FGM where the same UN Agencies participated and the target group is largely women and girls. To address duplication, a common Joint Steering Committee was established to oversee the work of all 3 UNJPs. Response to the question on coherence was asked for the 3 management structures of the UNJPGE which were rated as follows:

Table 10 Coherence Analysis

Higher synergy was noted at the decision-making level with moderate coherence at the Reference Group and Outcome Levels given the degree of technical issues they address. Overall there is evidence of synergy between PUNOs and IPs.

Structure Rating

Steering Committee H

Reference Group M

Outcome Level M

Page 38 of 68

Common understanding of the inter-relationships

Inter-relationships were noted at outcome level with examples drawn from Outcome 2 where collaboration between MoH and MoGLSD took place on policy development and policy planning for SGBV. Government level MoGLSD coordinated multiple inter-MDA relationships that facilitated realization of planned UNJPGE activities. The two UN agencies UNFPA and WHO worked together on operational standards for SGBV shelters with responsibilities as follows: i) WHO covering forensic medicine and improvement of laboratories, ii) UNFPA covering further training of medical personal on SGBV issues and iii) WHO and UNFPA led meetings that brought together different actors.

At CSO level, MIFUMI and Action Aid demonstrated high capacity in engagement of multi-stakeholders in addressing GBV inclusive of the police Child and Family Protection Unit (CFPU), Health Centres, L3 Courts, District Education Office (DEO) and District Health Office (DHO).

Attention to gender, human rights based approaches and RBM

Based on feedback and evidence from the analysis, attention to gender, RBA and RBM were noted as follows:

Table 11 Approaches Compliance

Approach Overall assessment Recommendation

Gender Evident in situational assessment, use of gender disaggregated, gender programming approaches as GRB, PGA, gender equality assessments, gender analysis, and gender statistics.

The programme should promote skills building, measurement and reporting on the gender approaches and tools.

HRBA Focus of the UNJPGE was to address access to services; therefore, the majority of effort is directed towards provision. Elements of prevention were noted in Outcome 2 and 3, protection in Outcome 2 and promotion in Outcome 1 and 4.

Clear linkages need to be drawn between prevention initiatives and provision and protection services on SGBV.

RBM UNJPGE uses RBM in planning, monitoring and reporting templates. Challenges were noted with RBM skills amongst the users given the quality of reports which are activity based and not results based.

Need for clarification of RBM terms and training to improve reporting.

Evaluation score B strong with minor weaknesses

Page 39 of 68

9. Management and Coordination The UNJPGE was expected to present a joint framework and reduce transaction costs for UN Agencies, Government and CSOs in line with Outcome 5: UN Partners Deliver Effective, Strategic and Efficient Support for Gender. The coordination fell under the UN Women, given their mandate on gender. A number of respondents (40%) indicated the challenge in defining what joint programming meant for the UNJPGE due to lack of implementation guidelines. The evaluation identified the joint activities under the UNJPGE based on document review. These joint activities include: (i) coordination mechanism, (ii) planning and reviews, and (iii) monitoring and cost efficiencies in operations. Assessment of the 3 functions was made below: Coordination Mechanisms (i) The Steering Committee: consisted of representatives of PUNO, Government and CSOs chaired by the

Government, UN and CSO representatives. The Steering Committee meets twice a year and provides strategic oversight for the programme.

(ii) Reference Group: was made up of the technocrats who met quarterly to discuss programme implementation strategies.

(iii) Outcome Teams: the operational teams met quarterly to plan and review implementation. Overall assessment of the coordination teams was positive and seen as contributing to delivery of service.

Planning and Reviews Good practices were noted with annual retreats organized for the UNJPGE programme participants. The 2012 retreat brought together key programme participants including government institutions, i.e.,NPA, MoGLSD, MFPED, UBOS, MOH, Civil Society organizations and UN agencies, UNFPA, UNICEF, WHO, OHCHR, UNDP, FAO, ILO and UN Women. While the 3 day event provided rich information, discussion and reflection on programme outputs, it was important for the forums to develop concise action points to be addressed in the coming year with a clear workplan, deliverables, and responsibilities. Joint Monitoring

The UNJPGE was effective in conducting the first joint monitoring trip in 2012 to 3 selected districts: Masaka, Lira and Moroto with 31 participants drawn from the 3 UNJPs inclusive of MoGLSD, MoH, MoES, UN Women, UNFPA, UNICEF, OHCHR, UNDP, ILO, FAO, and the Norwegian Embassy. The objective of the joint monitoring was documented as “to gain experience on what is happening at field level in terms of progress in the AWP 2012, establish the connections, the linkages, provide feedback, hold implementing partners accountable and speak to beneficiaries on whether the programme has yielded any positive results in their lives”13.The objective was met with positive feedback from the mission participants. It was noted the programme supported active learning by

Page 40 of 68

participants through participation in programme learning activities and addressed value for money through cost sharing and car pooling.

Evaluation score - A very strong with negligible weaknesses

5 Conclusion The evaluation addressed questions of relevance and strategic fit, validity of design, efficiency, effectiveness, and sustainability, within the UNJPGE management, and coordination and sustainability. The following conclusions were drawn:

Relevance and Strategic Fit

Designed on the heels of the 2010-2014 UNDAF, the programme leveraged the UNDAF development process, its priorities closely aligned to the national priorities of the National Development Plan (NDP) and Uganda Gender Policy and the international priorities CEDAW, 1325 and 1820. Moving forward, the UNJPGE stands to inform the next UNDAF in terms of gender priorities in the country based on lessons learned from the UNJPGE

The programme strategically engaged Government MDAs, UN Agencies and CSOs each bringing key institutional expertise, mandates and resources that facilitated ownership of multiple national stakeholders.

Challenges with the intervention logic go back to the design process. At midterm there is need to engage in collective effort that provides corrective action and facilitate ownership of tools, approaches, strategies in use by IPs. It is recommended that the Reference Group lead such a process to ensure relevance of the intervention logic through alignment of outcome, output, and indicators. Performance measurement can be enhanced by a Results Matrix that serves the needs of the IPs.

Efficiency

While key steps were taken to improve efficiency by PUNOs service delivery, the programme will need to address credibility risk through strategies that facilitate timely funds transfer and biannual disbursement plan that acknowledges the individual utilization rates of each agency and systems that consolidate gains at outcome level.

The UNJPGE management structures facilitated forums for monitoring and decision making. Various forums were provided for review and monitoring of the UNJPGE. The Annual Retreats were good opportunities to reflect and share lessons and should be improved with identification of priorities for inclusion in the workplan. The first monitoring mission provided learning and sharing forums for programme participants.

Effectiveness

Outcome 1: The programme was effective in building the capacity of government institutions through contribution of critical gender skills, i.e., gender mainstreaming, GRB and CEDAW reporting. Systems were in place to support knowledge management through an E-Source Library for the benefit of the entire government MDAs. Buy-in will be required from decision makers to support the technocrats implementing the projects.

PGAs and gender equality agreements have contributed to identification of institutional gaps and development of action plans. Support will be required to finance those action points that fall beyond the funding of UNJPGE. On the

Page 41 of 68

other hand, the gender equality assessments provide a basis for dialogue with Ministry of Finance on GRB. Ultimately, the goal of GRB of increasing budgeting to the seven sectors will require concerted effort over the next phase. The programme was effective in the introduction of partnership with UBOS in the collection and analysis of data. Support will also be required in positing of the one person gender unit to leverage the support of the Director and the agency will need to consider use of alternate resources such as university students in support of this critical component of the programme

Outcome 2: While the UNJPGE offers comprehensive response framework; the UNJPGE will need to expedite the provision of shelters which have continued to lag behind schedule. Functional referral systems will need to be effected at community level to improve GBV referral and management. The programme will benefit from centralized data collection of GBV indicators to support reporting and tracking of rape and violations of women and girls. Currently, this is not in place with uncoordinated agency data collection systems. Linkages will also need to be drawn with prevention initiatives and cohesive communication messages supported with an advocacy strategy.

Outcome 3: Good practices were noted with the GEM Club which has led to return of over 4000 girls to school. Sustainability of the clubs will need to be addressed given the district level support and ownership of communities. More effort is required to understand the cause of teenage pregnancies in support of school retention strategies.

Outcome 4: The UNJPGE contributed to coordination and networking of CSOs on national gender priorities. More effort will be required for pro-budget initiatives that influence budget allocation to complement the post-budget analysis and audits conducted in the past.

Sustainability

Commitment and ownership by government as the main development partner was noted with contribution of human resources and time to the programme initiatives. In the first phase, the government did not provide financial contribution to the programme; the next phase will need to start discussions on how the government will address continuity of initiatives at the end of the programme.

Although service delivery and operational structures have been established and initiated at district level, UNJPGE remained a high level programme focussed towards national stakeholders. There is need to strengthen institutions in the districts through resourcing of local government institutions and institutional building of CBOs. Success stories and lessons in coordination at community levels should be shared to support the role of those coordination agencies that service GBV survivors especially on referral systems and centralized data collection to improve programme efficiencies at community level. More forums are needed to engage and capture voices of beneficiaries of the programme.

Management and Coordination

The management and coordination structures of the JPGE were effective and efficient in the strategic role of programme direction and management with high levels of coherence noted. The second phase will require the same level of collaboration to realize the results of the UNJPGE.

Page 42 of 68

6 Lessons Investment of time in a comprehensive baseline study can be cost effective in the long run, rather than a programme spending many resources to correct gaps in project design. The programme could have avoided the risks posed by the design by through investing at the outset of the programme in a 3 month baseline study vs. three years of corrective action.

Communication of national programme goals can help in distribution of resources, build blocks in inter government and CSO relations, and guide implementation with better understanding of the overall picture and each individual agency’s contribution to it. It is for this reason that national governments share their strategies with the nation - for all to understand what is at stake.

The mandates, powers, and authorities of the PUNO may be an obstacle for genuine realisation of outcome 5. Many lessons were offered by the numerous UNJPs implemented by UN Agencies worldwide. Success comes when individuals in coordinating roles are able to navigate the politics of individual agencies to effectively deliver the goals of ONE UN. Uganda, with 7 UNJPs, offers many lessons for the UNJPGE Coordinating Team in their achievement of Outcome 5.

UNJPGE remained a high level programme focussed towards Kampala stakeholders. There was need to strengthen institutions in the districts through resourcing of local government institutions and institutional building of CBOs. Success stories and lessons in coordination at community levels should be shared to support the role of those coordination agencies that service GBV survivors especially on referral systems and centralized data collection to improve programme efficiencies at community level. More forums were needed to engage and capture voices of beneficiaries of the programme.

Programme visibility plays out differently at national and district levels. At national level, the programme participants engaged in the various activities and management structures can speak to the over-arching goal and outcome; the same could not be said for the district level participants. There is lack of understanding of the goals and outcomes of the national UNJPGE. The programme is compromised by lack of visibility at all levels of operation. The programme strategy of integration is commendable; however, the programme could have avoided the information gaps by sharing the goals of the programme to enable all programme participants to have common understanding in order to facilitate better management and contribution to the overall picture.

Pilot projects and small scale interventions meant to benefit the whole country tend to remain confined to the target areas due to lack of planning for scale up. The UNJPGE implemented in 10 out of 100 districts can facilitate the roll out of lessons and good practices from its initiatives to the rest of the country. This can only be done where IPs recognise the potential for replication and documentation of those initiatives that can be scaled up or replicated outside of the 10 districts.

The multiple stakeholder approach to SGBV creates numerous channels for survivors to access services and creates user-friendly spaces for women and children, men and boys who face GBV. The UNJPGE can contribute to central data collection and management through coordinated approach to reporting given the limitations in the central data collection.

The intensified training of health workers at both national level and district level on clinical management of survivors of rape has contributed to the improved health care. It has also caused a policy consideration of developing service

Page 43 of 68

standards and guidelines for delivery of forensic services in health and management of SGBV. This training and supervision has also involved the university departments of Forensic Medicine and Obstetrics and Gynaecology as well as Mulago hospital as a national referral hospital. This initiative provides indicators of sustainability that the programme can leveraged.

Lessons on knowledge management have shown it goes beyond information technology, document management, and building information portals. MoGLSD has taken key steps in establishing these and it should translate into value addition through leveraging the improved human capital and strengthened institutional capability to deliver quality public service on gender in Uganda.

7 Recommendations Recommendations

The following recommendations are made to the UNJPGE stakeholders:

Relevance

Recommendation 1 Align Intervention Logic - Reference Group

Address inconsistencies in the intervention logic to enable the changes at Outcome level to be reflected consistently through the logical frame, i.e., outcomes, outputs and indicators level through revision of the Results Matrix. Engage IPs to leverage knowledge and expertise within the UNJPGE.

Provide training on RBM to improve results based reporting and move away from activity based reporting.

Efficiency

Recommendation 2 Consolidate gains at Outcome level - Steering Committee

Revise the blanket biannual rate caveat of 75% utilization rate for all partners to reward the top performers with disbursement according to plan.

In the case of low fund utilization, initiate systems that allow funds to be redirected to partners that operate and contribute to the same Outcome to consolidate gains and realization of outcome goals.

Continue effort to address historic challenges that resulted in delayed disbursements and reporting to improve efficiencies.

Effectiveness

Recommendation 3 Multi-sectoral framework

Establish the planned multi-sectoral frameworks for monitoring and reporting of national, regional and international commitments to strengthen national capacity and government accountabilities

Recommendation 4 Elevate Gender Unit in UBOs to Director’s Office – UN Women Outcome 1 Lead

Page 44 of 68

Support positioning of UBOS within the Director’s Office for effective decision making and action on gender statistics. Introduce an internship programme for statistics university students to support UBOS Gender Unit as well as expose the students to gender statistics to build a resource team of young advocates.

Recommendation 5 Improve effectiveness of central and district government systems - Reference Group

Continue engagement of decision makers in key institutions and training on gender mainstreaming to support the technocrats who are working in the institutions to bring change on gender.

Address resourcing and capacity needs of local government institutions through creating linkages between UNJPGE initiatives at central and district levels and leverage other UNJPGEs with resources targeted at local government.

Recommendation 6 Improve effectiveness of SBV service provision – UNFPA Outcome 2 Lead

Develop clear action points to expedite operations of the GBV Shelters, reduce the barriers that hinder reporting of GBV and rape cases, facilitate referral systems at community levels and policy advocacy on the use of PF3 to allow other professionals such as mid wives to examine cases and address capacity of JLOS institutions.

The UNJPGE to contribute to central data collection and management through coordinated approach to reporting given the limitations in the central data collection

Recommendation 7 Consolidate messaging and advocacy – Reference Group

Develop a UNJPGE communication strategy to guide messaging on over-arching goals of the UNJPGE and their contribution to the overall picture for all stakeholders at central and district level, guide GRB advocacy, donor communication for funding of components that have resulted from UNJPGE but lack funding, e.g. gender audit findings, and to raise awareness for potential future initiatives beyond the funding period.

Sustainability

Recommendation 8 Sustainability Strategies/ Exit Strategies– Reference Group

Develop the overarching UNJPGE sustainability guidelines to support IPs in development of individual agency exit plans and sustainability strategies providing adequate time for resourcing and integration into agency plans before the end of the UNJPGE.

Page 45 of 68

8 Annexes

Annex 1 Outcome Analysis

Original Outcomes based on ProDoc

2009

2010 programme review outcome 2011 programme review Revised outcomes on work-plan May

2012

Outcome 1

Central(selected sectors ) local government have strategies, systems and staff capacities to increase women’s access to sustainable livelihood and gainful employment

Central and local governments have strategies, systems and staff capabilities to increase women’s access to sustainable livelihoods and gainful employment

Strengthened government capacity for gender responsive planning; budgeting and programme management to directly benefit women and girls

Strengthened government capacity for gender responsive planning; budgeting and programme management to directly benefit women and girls

Outcome 2

Effective policies and strategies to reduce GBV and increase women’s access to justice developed at all levels and advocacy strategies for implementation at both national and local level being implemented

Effective policies and strategies to reduce gender-based violence and increase women's access to justice developed at all levels, and advocacy strategies for their implementation at both national and local level being implemented

Improved access to legal, health, and psychosocial services of SGBV survivors

Improved access to legal, health, and psychosocial services of SGBV survivors

Outcome 3

Policies, systems and strategies developed for citizens’ active participation in policies and decision making and accountability processes, including Parliament, political parties, local government and community organizations that impact the advancement of gender equality

Policies, systems and strategies developed for citizens’ active participation in politics and decision-making and accountability processes, including Parliament, political parties, local government and community organizations that impact the advancement of gender equality

Discontinued

New outcome introduced Increased school participation, completion and achievement rates of girls in primary education

Increased school participation, completion and achievement rates of girls in primary education

Outcome 4

Strategies, plans and capacities to reduce gender gaps in selected MDGs related progress developed by relevant government institutions and CSOs

Priority Gender gaps in selected MDG related programmes addressed by relevant government institutions and CSOs

Civil society has increased capacity to advocate and demand accountability from government for delivery on gender responsive laws, policies and strategies

Civil society has increased capacity to advocate and demand accountability from government for delivery on gender responsive laws, policies and strategies

Outcome 5

National Gender machinery and key stakeholders have systems, plans, budgets and human resources in place to effectively coordinate, implement and monitor Gender and Macro Economic

National Gender machinery and key stakeholders have systems, plans, budgets and human resources in place to effectively coordinate, implement and monitor Gender and

Discontinued

Page 46 of 68

Policies Macro Economic Policies

Outcome 6

The UN System in Uganda provides comprehensive coherent and effective support to gender responsive programming in the country within joint programming framework

The UN system in Uganda provides strategic, comprehensive, coherent and effective support to gender responsive programming in the country within a joint programming framework

UN partners deliver effective, strategic and efficient support for gender

Page 47 of 68

Annex 2 Evaluation Matrix

Evaluation Criteria: 1. Relevance and Strategic Fit

Specific Criteria Evaluation Question Indicator Collection Method Data Source

1.1 Alignment with national needs and priorities

Is the programme addressing the needs identified in the baseline in the country? To what extent is the programme contributing to national priorities identified in the design stage? What new needs have emerged and how has the programme responded to them?

Gender sensitive baseline indicators Degree of alignment with national priorities Degree of alignment with international gender and HR priorities Degree of responsiveness to emerging issues

Document review, literature search Key informant interviews

Concept note, Prodoc, National Gender Policy, National Development Plan and other national policies. UN Agencies, Government, CSOs and DFID

1.2 Stakeholder Ownership

Who are the partners of the programme? How strategic are partners in terms of mandate, influence, capacities and commitment? How relevant are the UNJPGE Outcomes and Goal to the partners? Are stakeholders taking ownership of the project concept and design? How has GoU demonstrated its commitment as the main development partner? How do the implementation partners demonstrate ownership? To what extent are project beneficiaries women and men, and sub-groups within them, involved in the programme design?

Level of stakeholder engagement Partner selection criteria Degree of synergy/fit between partners’ mandate and programme goals Degree of Government/CSO resources focussed on the programme Degree of partner ability to attract funding from other donors Degree of community engagement and ownership

Document Review Key informant interviews Focus Group Discussion

Prodoc, Annual Plans and Reports Government & CSOs Programme beneficiaries, communities, women and men

Evaluation criteria: 2. Validity of Design Specific criteria Evaluation question Indicator Collection method Data Source 2.1 Alignment with UNDAF

Was the UNJPGE or UNDAF programme design informed by gender analysis?

Use of gender and human rights approaches, analysis and strategies

Document review Key informant Interviews

Concept note Prodoc, Annual Plans and Reports PUNOs

2.2 Intervention logic How relevant are the Degree of congruence Document review M & E Framework,

Page 48 of 68

programme outputs and outcomes in relation to the baseline? Is the intervention logic coherent and realistic? To what extent is there causal relationship between planned outcomes and impact? How do the programme outcomes contribute to the development goal? To what extent are indicators, tracking, means of verification and reporting appropriateness?

between baseline and outputs Degree & use of gender disaggregated data Degree of reporting and tracking of indicators Quality of reporting

Analysis of the logic frame, Theory of change analysis Key informant interviews

Annual reports and reviews UNJPGE Logic Frame PUNO

Evaluation criteria: 3. Efficiency Specific Criteria Evaluation question Indicator Collection method Data Source 3.1 Resource adequacy Have resources been used

efficiently? Have activities supporting the strategy been cost-effective? Have programme funds and activities been delivered in a timely manner? If not, what were the bottlenecks encountered? Are there sufficient resources (financial, time, people) allocated to integrate human rights and gender equality in the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the UNJPGE?

Expenditure within budget Cost saving measures Work plan management No cost extensions % of budget allocated to human rights Number of staff dedicated to the programme Degree of expertise and technical support

Document review Key informant interviews

Annual budgets, Financial reports, Audit Reports, PONU Annual Work Plans and Budgets UNW, Administrative Agent, PUNO, DFID Government, CSOs

3.2 Implementation challenges

Are there any constraints (e.g. political, practical, and bureaucratic) to addressing human rights and gender Equality efficiently during implementation? What level of effort is made to overcome these challenges?

Risk assessment Resolution of implementation challenges

Document review Key Informant Interviews

Minutes of Steering Committee, Monitoring Reports, Annual Reports DFID, PUNO, Government & CSOs

Evaluation Criteria: 4. Effectiveness Specific Criteria Evaluation question Indicator Collection method Data Source 4.1 Progress towards outcomes (to be assed for each of the 4 outcomes)

Is the programme making sufficient progress towards its planned outcomes What outputs have been achieved? Have the quantity and

Degree of government capacity in planning for gender Level of access to services for GBV survivors

Document review Interviews, FDGs

Quarterly, Annual Reports; Annual Reviews PUNO, Implementing Agencies government,

Page 49 of 68

quality of the outputs produced so far been satisfactory? Do the benefits accrue equally to men and women? Is the programme likely to achieve its planned outcomes upon completion? What risks could potentially undermine the achievement of planned outcomes and how are they addressed?

Degree of retention of girls in school Level of empowerment of women to demand engendered policy/services

CSOs, beneficiaries

4.2 UN partners delivery

How effectively are UN agencies working together? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the existing UNJPGE arrangement, (Governance, leadership, strategy, structure, staffing, program work, funding, quality concerns, horizontal coordination)? What are the existing capacities (strengths) and concerns (weaknesses) related to the UNJPGE implementation? What are the capacities needed for the UNJPGE to be a good mechanism?

Degree of collaboration Economies of scale Reduction in duplication Level of joint programming

Document Review Key informant Interviews

PUNO Annual Review Reports PUNO, DFID, Government and CSOs

Evaluation Criteria: 5. Sustainability Specific Criteria Evaluation question Indicator Collection method Data Source 5.1 Sustainability strategy

Does the programme have a sustainability strategy? How does the programme address national/local ownership? What is the capacity of development partners to support positive changes in human rights and gender equality after the end of the intervention? What steps have PUNO taken to develop and/or enhance the operating capacities of national partners during the first phase of implementation? To what extent have the

Level of sustainability of input resources by partners Level of capacity of partners for uptake of programme activities Level of institutional building, skills, systems and strategies

Document Review Key informant interviews

Steering Committee minutes PUNO and partner plans PUNO and Government and CSOs

Page 50 of 68

stakeholders addressed sustainability beyond funding period? Are partners able to attract new resources from diversified sources (e.g. traditional and non traditional donors & contributors) at national and international level?

Percentage funding increase Degree of resource contribution

Financial analysis Documentary Review Key informant interviews

Prodoc, MOU, Annual progress reports; Review Reports by Donor (DFID)

5.2 Changes at partner level

To what degree are partners changing their policies or practices to improve human rights and gender equality fulfilment (e.g. new services, greater responsiveness, resource re-allocation, improved quality, etc.)?

Degree of influence of UNJPGE principles and approaches New human rights and gender offerings by partner, i.e., strategies, policies, etc. Degree of replication of good practices Human rights and gender skills

Document Review Key informant interviews

Government, CSOs Annual reports, PUNO Annual Reviews Government, CSOs, PUNO

Evaluation criteria: 6. Coherence Specific Criteria Evaluation question Indicator Collection method Data Source 6.1 Common agenda To what degree are

partners working towards the same results with a common understanding of the interrelationship between interventions? To what extent has the Joint Programme enhanced collaboration between the UN Agencies, government and CSOs? To what extent are approaches such as attention to gender, human rights based approach to programming and results based management understood and pursued in a coherent fashion?

Degree of synergy and collaboration by partners and PUNO Networking and referrals Degree of communication (new or increased) New or increased platforms for dialogue with other government line ministries or departments, beyond the traditional MOGLSD Degree of application of gender approaches, analysis, tools and systems

Document Review Key informant Interviews

Steering Committee minutes, Quarterly, Annual Reports UNDAF, UNCT, UNRC Annual Reports, Individual agency reports, Prodoc; MOU Annual progress reports; Annual Reviews by donor (DFID) PONU, Government, CSOs and DFID

Evaluation Criteria: 7 Management and Coordination Specific Criteria Evaluation question Indicator Collection method Data Source 7.1 PUNO Coordination How well are responsibilities

delineated and implemented in a complementary fashion? How well have the

Level of coordination among PUNO and partners Degree of expertise on

Document Review Key informant

Annual Reports, PUNO Reviews, Reports to UNCT

Page 51 of 68

coordination functions been fulfilled? Are management and implementation capacities (coordination, participating UN agencies, IPs) adequate? How has the programme made strategic use of coordination and collaboration with other Joint Programmes to increase its effectiveness and impact? How has the UNJPGE managed differences in methodology and approaches in PUNO (e.g. prioritization of areas and populations, methodology for community mobilization, modality of delivery of technical assistance)

human rights and gender Degree of linkages with other UNJPGEs

Interviews UN Women, PUNOs, UNDP as Admin Agent, UNCT

7.2 Programme monitoring

How effectively does the programme management monitor programme performance and results? Have appropriate means of verification for tracking progress, performance and achievement of indicator values been defined? Is relevant information and data systematically being collected and collated? Is information being regularly analysed to feed into management decisions?

Degree of joint monitoring of activities Quality of indicators Frequency of data collection and reporting Quality of reporting

Document review Key Informant Interviews

M&E Framework, Monitoring Reports by joint PUNO M&E Reference Group, UN Women M&E Officer, PUNO and DFID

Page 52 of 68

Annex 3 Evaluation Questions

The evaluation questions were clustered into 4 priorities in the matrix of evaluation questions to elicit response on the following: Design including evaluation criteria relevance and strategic fit; secondly, relevance of design Results including efficiency and effectiveness of the joint programme Sustainability focuses on sustainability of programme beyond funding Synergy includes coherence, management, and coordination

Matrix of Evaluation Questions

Design

Question Criteria

1. Is the programme addressing the needs identified in the baseline? Relevance 1.1

2. To what extent is the programme contributing to national priorities identified in the design stage?

Relevance 1.1

3. What new needs have emerged and how has the programme responded to them? Relevance 1.1

4. Who are the partners of the programme? How strategic are partners in terms of mandate, influence, capacities, and commitment?

Relevance 1.2

5. How relevant are the UNJPGE Outcomes and Goals to the partners? To what extent are stakeholders taking ownership of the project concept and design?

Relevance 1.2

6. How has GoU demonstrated its commitment as the main development partner? How do the implementation partners demonstrate ownership? To what extent were project beneficiaries women and men, and sub-groups within them, involved in the design of the programme?

Relevance 1.2; 5.1

7. Was the UNJPGE or UNDAF programme design informed by gender analysis? Validity of design 2.1

8. How relevant are the programme outputs and outcomes in relation to the baseline? Is the intervention logic coherent and realistic? To what extent is there causal relationship between planned outcomes and impact? How do the programme outcomes contribute to the development goal? To what extent are indicators, tracking, means of verification and reporting appropriate?

Validity of design 2.2

Results

Question Criteria

1. Are there sufficient resources (financial, time, people) allocated to integrate human rights and gender equality in the design, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of the UNJPGE?

Efficiency 3.1

2. To what extent have resources been used efficiently? Have activities supporting the strategy been cost-effective? To what extent have programme funds and activities been delivered in a timely manner? If not, what were the bottlenecks encountered?

Efficiency 3.1

3. What constraints (e.g. political, practical, and bureaucratic) exist to addressing human rights and gender equality efficiently during implementation? What level of effort is made to

Efficiency 3.2

Page 53 of 68

overcome these challenges?

4. Is the programme making sufficient progress towards its planned outcomes? Are PUNO and IPs implementing activities according to plan?

What outputs have been achieved?

Effectiveness 4.1

5. Have the quantity and quality of the outputs produced so far been satisfactory? Do the benefits accrue equally to women and men, girls and boys?

Effectiveness 4.1

6. Is the programme likely to achieve its planned outcomes upon completion?

What risks could potentially undermine the achievement of planned outcomes and how were they addressed?

Effectiveness 4.1

7. To what extent are UN agencies working effectively together?

What are the strengths and weaknesses of the existing UNJPGE arrangement, i.e.,

Governance, leadership, strategy, structure, staffing, program work, funding, quality concerns, horizontal coordination?

Effectiveness 4.2

8. What are the existing capacities (strengths) and concerns (weaknesses) related to the UNJPGE implementation? What are the capacities needed for the UNJPGE to be a good mechanism?

Effectiveness 4.2

9. What innovative / good practices in programming have been introduced by UNJPGE? Effectiveness 4.2

Sustainability

Question Criteria

1. To what extent have the stakeholders addressed sustainability beyond funding period? Does the programme have a sustainability strategy?

Sustainability 5.1

2. How does the programme address national/local ownership? Sustainability 5.1; Relevance 1.2

3. What is the capacity of development partners to support positive changes in human rights and gender equality beyond the end of the intervention?

Sustainability 5.1

4. What steps were taken to develop and/or enhance the operating capacities of development partners of the UNJPGE?

Sustainability 5.1

5. Are partners able to attract new resources from diversified sources (e.g. traditional and non traditional donors and contributors) at national and international level?

Sustainability 5.1

6. To what degree are partners changing their policies or practices to improve human rights and gender equality fulfilment (e.g. new services, greater responsiveness, resource re-allocation, improved quality, etc.)?

Sustainability 5.2

Synergy

Question Criteria

1. To what degree are partners working towards the same results with a common understanding of the interrelationship between interventions?

Coherence 6.1

2. To what extent has the Joint Programme enhanced collaboration between the UN Agencies, Coherence 6.1

Page 54 of 68

government and CSOs?

3. To what extent are approaches such as attention to gender, human rights based approach to programming, and results based management understood and pursued in a coherent fashion?

Coherence 6.1

4. Are management and implementation capacities (coordination, participating UN agencies, IPs) adequate?

Management and Coordination 7.1

5. How well have the coordination functions been fulfilled? How well are responsibilities delineated and implemented in a complementary fashion? What is the value addition of each participating UN Agency? Does the UNJPGE leverage expertise of the PUNO?


6. How does the UNJPGE manage PUNO differences in methodology and approach (e.g. prioritization of areas and populations, methodology for community mobilization, modality of delivery of technical assistance)?


7. How has the programme leveraged other Joint Programmes to increase its effectiveness and impact?


8. How effectively does the programme management monitor programme performance and results?


9. To what extent have appropriate means of verification for tracking progress, performance and achievement of indicator values been defined? Is relevant information and data systematically being collected and collated? Is information being regularly analysed to feed into management decisions?


10. What lessons can be shared to improve implementation in the next phase? Other

Page 55 of 68

Annex 4 Documents Reviewed

Document Type Document Title Status

Project documents (including concept note, project plans, work plans,

JPGE PRODOC – Joint Programme Plan √

Joint Programming On Gender Equality Results Matrix

√

Joint Programming On Gender Equality Work Plans (2012)

√

Monitoring and Evaluation reports quarterly and annual reports, field monitoring reports and previous evaluation reports)

Annual Review JPGE 2010 DFID

Consolidated Annual Report on Activities Implemented under the UN Joint Programme “Gender Equality” (UN JP On Gender Equality). Report of the Administrative Agent for the period 1 January - 31 December 2011

√

Annual Review of the UN Joint Programme on Gender Equality 2011 DFID

√

Report of the 2011 Retreat of the Gender Reference Group 2011 √

Samples of 2011 Annual Reports from PUNOs and partners √

Samples of Quarterly Reports (Q1,Q2,Q3,Q4) from PUNOs and partners

√

Financials (budget, financial reports)

JPGE Workplan and Budget 2011-2014

Financial Report for the period ending December 2010

Financial Report for the period ending December 2011

Financial Annual Progress Report I Jan – 31 December 2011

√

Donor Agreements Standard Administrative Agreement between DFID, Government of UK of Ireland and Northern Ireland and UNDP

√

Amendment No 1 to the Standard Administrative Agreement √

Studies, research Participatory Gender Audit UNDP √

Advocacy and Communications material

Guidelines for Establishment and Management of GBV Shelters in Uganda

COU Resolution on Gender Based Violence, HIV Prevention, Family Planning and Reproductive Health by the House of Bishops on the 5th November 2012

A Guide Book for Pastoral Agents on Sexual Reproductive Health

-

Page 56 of 68

Annex 5 List of Person Interviewed

Name & Title Organization

Lebogang Motlana, Country Director UNDP

Enock Mugabi, Gender Focal Point UNDP

Ester Cherop, National Program Officer UNFPA

Jutta Marjanen,UNJPGEOfficer M&E UNFPA

Cecile Campaore, Deputy Rep UNFPA

Florence Apuri Auma, Team Leader Gender UNFPA

Evelyn Letiyo, Technical Specialist GBV UNFPA

Judy Kamanyi, Consultant UN Women

Apolo Kyeyune, M&E Officer UN Women

Paulina Chiwangu, Resident Representative UN Women

Thaddeus Sserukeera, UNJPGE M&E Officer UN Women

Agnes Kisembo, National Programme Specialist UNJPGE

UN Women

Sandra Huesser, Gender & Economic Programme Officer

UN Women

Brian Mwinamura, Finance Officer UN Women

Rosemary Ruganda, Education Specialist UNICEF

Biriyai Theophilus, Deputy Resident Representative OHCHR

Roberta Traveri, Human Rights Officer - UNJPGE Focal Point

OHCHR

Among Irene, Social Development Adviser DFID

Agnes Ndamata, Programme Manager DFID

Jennifer Bukokhe, National Programme Officer UNCDF

Sylvia Tereka, Executive Board Member NPA

Judith Mutabazi, Sectoral Policy &Planning Officer NPA

Kareem Buyana, National Gender Expert NPA

Sarah Nahalamba, Senior Gender &Social Devt Officer NPA

Rose Mary Nalwadda, Consultant UBOS

Stella Nassolo, Gender Officer UBOS

Margaret Kasiko, Gender Technical Advisor MoES

Harriet Ajilong, Gender Desk Officer MoES

Rita Kyeyune, Deputy Gender Desk Officer MoES

Rita Aciro, Executive Director UWONET

HIV/AIDS and Gender Based Violence for Catholic Communities

Page 57 of 68

Betty Kasiko, Director Programmes UWONET

Julius Mukunda, Senior Programme Director FOWODE

Joseph Adweka, Programme Officer/ Acting Provincial Health Coordinator

CoU

Juliet Kapito, Data Statistician CoU

Sarah Kasule, Provincial Mothers Union Worker CoU

Charity Kiconco, Accounts Assistant CoU

Nickson Goral, Partnership Funding and Sponsorship Director

AAUI

Hellen Malinga Apila, National Coordinator, Women Rights and Gender Equality

AAUI

Irene Kharono, Director Programmes AAUI

Harriet Gimbo, Programme Development Manager AAUI

Paul Ojuman, Policy Manager AAUI

Yuda Rwakogo, Grants Coordinator AAUI

Hellen Alobo, Project Officer Women Protection centers

AAUI

Peace Lamono, Legal Office, Women Protection Centre

AAUI

Chizgani Nganzi, Project Coordinator, Women Protection Centre

AAUI

Judith Nakalembe, Coordinator MIFUMI, Masaka District

Catherine Babirye, Social Worker MIFUMI, Masaka District

Lillian Musisi, District Community Development Officer – In-Charge Gender

Masaka District

Akumo Christine Okot Gender Officer Gulu District Office

Peter Douglas Okello Speaker of Parliament Gulu District Office

Pamela Judith Angwedi Director GWED- G

Jacqueline Makiwah Uganda Catholic Secretariat

Hadija Namuddu MoGLSD

Adjaratou Fatou Ndiaye, Gender Advisor MoGLSD

Kenneth Ayebazibwe, E-Resource Manager MoGLSD

Innocent Tushabe MoGLSD

Josephine Chandira MoGLSD

Brian Masimbi, Statistician MoGLSD

Noel Mosimbi MoGLSD

Page 58 of 68

Jane Ekapu, Principal Gender Officer MoGLSD

Annex 6 Inception Meeting Participants January 8, 2013

Name Designation Agency/Inst. Telephone E-mail

Caroline Chikoore Consultant Leading Edge 1-905-239-3808 [email protected]

Simon Peter Opolot Consultant TRIO 0772861116 [email protected]

Apolo Kyeyune M&E Officer UN Women 0772120768 [email protected]

Paulina Chiwangu UNJPGE Coordinator UN Women 0757104745 [email protected]

Agnes Kisembo NPS UN Women 0772972683 [email protected]

Judy Kamanyi Consultant UN Women 0712803848 [email protected]

Thaddeus Sserukeera UNJPGE M&E UN Women 0701574415 [email protected]

Sandra Huesser Gender & Economics UN Women 0774476556 [email protected]

Adjaratou Ndiaye Gender Advisor MoGLSD

UN Women 0793202604 [email protected]

Jane Ekapu PGO MoGLSD 0753359220 [email protected]

Innocent Tushabe Programme Officer MoGSLD 0752724040 [email protected]

Kareem Buyana TA NPA 0752314006 [email protected]

Evelyn Letiyo Tech. Specialist UNFPA 0772866778 [email protected]

Annex 7 List of Participants Debriefing/Validation Meeting March 1, 2013

Names Position Originations Contact E-mail

1 Elisabet Fish Coordination Specialist UNRCO [email protected]

2 Rose Nalwadda Consultant UBOS 0772490132 [email protected]

3 Adji Fatou Ndiaye Gender Advisor, MGLSD/UN Women

0783202606

Page 59 of 68

4 Irene Among Social Development Advisor

DFID 0772700063 [email protected]

5 Buyana Kareem National Programme Officer

NPA 0752314006 [email protected]

6 Malusi Nsinga Programme Assistant UNCDF 0772420280

7 Evelyn Letiyo Technical Specialist UNFPA 0772866778 [email protected]

8 Florence Apuri Auma SNPO UNFPA 0772641050 [email protected]

9 Irene Kharono Director Programmes Action Aid Uganda

0772513586

10 Alex Rodriguez Chief Economist UNDP 0772419770

11 Jotham Mubangizi Coordinator JUPSA UNAIDS 0772412770 [email protected]

12 Janet Jackson Country Representative UNFPA 0772221039 [email protected]

13 Ahunna E Onochie UN Resident Coordinator UN 0716005105

14 Chizgani Nganzi Project Coordinator Action Aid 0783749388 [email protected]

15 Birgit Gerstenberg OIC OHCHR 0772775781 [email protected]

16 Betty Kasiko Director of programmes UWONET 0759330004 [email protected]

17 Dreeni Geer Country Director WCC 0772010691 Dreeni @warchild.ca

18 Jane Ekapu Principal Gender Officer MGLSD 0753359220 [email protected]

19 Dr Sentumbwe FHP WHO 0772473600 [email protected]

20 Kisembo Agnes National Programme Specialist

UN Women 0772972683 [email protected]

21 Brian Mwinamura Finance Officer UN Women 0772411558

22 Nassolo Stella Coordinator UBOS 0782882321 [email protected]

23 Nakalembe Juliet Coordinator MIFUMI 0777574280 [email protected]

24 Solomy Awiidi Programme Manger MIFUMI 0782467593 [email protected]

25 Ssemambo Taddewo UNV UN Women 0701574415 [email protected]

26 Marianna Garofalo UNV UNFPA

27 Ayebazibwe Kenneth Programme Officer MGLSD 0774185458 [email protected]

28 Innocent Tushabe MGLSD 0752824040 [email protected]

Page 60 of 68

29 Judy Kamanyi Consultant UN Women 0712803848 [email protected]

30 Enock Mugabi Consultant UNDP

32 Silvia Pasti Chief Child Protection UNICEF

33 Ali Forder Deputy Head DFID, Kampala 0772700047 [email protected]

34 Paulina Chiwangu Coordinator UN JPGE 0757104745 [email protected]

Page 61 of 68

Annex 8 Terms of Reference

UN JOINT PROGRAMME ON GENDER EQUALITY Supported by UKaid from the Department for International Development

Programme Title: THE UNITED NATIONS JOINT PROGRAMME ON GENDER EQUALITY (UNJPGE) 2010- 2014 – UGANDA

Duty Station: Kampala, Uganda

Application Deadline: 3rd October 2011 Type of Contract: Individual Contract

Post Level: International Consultant/ National Consultant

Languages Required: English

Starting Date: 22nd October 2012 (Date when the selected candidate is expected to start)

Typology of the consultancy: International (with National)

Duration of Initial Contract: 25 days over a 2 month period

Expected Duration of Assignment: 25 days over a 2 month period

I. Description of the Programme The United Nations Joint Programme on Gender Equality in Uganda (UN) is a five- year programme (2010-2014) coordinated by the UN Entity for Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment (UN Women), involving ten UN Agencies, six Government Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) and two national CSO networks advocating for gender equality and women’s empowerment. The purpose of the UNJPGE is to address the national priorities for gender equality as outlined in the Uganda Gender Policy and its corresponding National Action Plan. The goal of the UNJPGE is to ‘enhance gender equality in access to services and opportunities.’ The programme is aligned and contributes to the National Development Plan and the Millennium Development Goals targets. The UNJPGE outcome areas are also aligned to the UN Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) 2010 -2014, and

contribute to specific UNDAF Outcomes. The programme is expected to contribute to the realisation of five key outcomes: Outcome 1 focuses on the strengthened government capacity for gender responsive planning, budgeting andprogramme management to directly benefit women and girls. It targets the capacity of Ministry of Gender, Labourand Social Development (MoGLSD) to effectively coordinate the gender-related initiatives in the country, in close collaboration with the key government MDAs in the accountability sector. Outcome 2aims at enhanced at improved access to legal, health, and psychosocial services of SGBV survivorsseeks to

Page 62 of 68

deliverprotection and legal redress for survivors of sexual and gender-based violence in Uganda, through the implementation of an integrated model of services and appropriate spaces for women and children who encounter this type of violence. The integrated model includes a number of legal, psycho-social and health services. Outcome 3 aims at increased school participation, completion and achievement rates of girls in primary education.It includes the dissemination of the Gender and Education Policy in all the regions in Uganda, the construction of in numerous sanitary facilities in schools, and the return of boys and girls to school, through the empowering peer mechanism of the Girl’s Education Movement (GEM) clubs. Outcome 4 focuses on civil society’s capacity to advocate and demand accountability from government for deliveryon gender responsive laws, policies and strategies. Outcome 5 aims at getting UN partners deliver effective, strategic and efficient support for gender-responsivegovernance. The programme is implemented in ten target districts and is funded by the Department for International Development (DFID) in agreement with Government of Uganda, and participating UN agencies through the Multi-Partner Trust Fund Office (MPTF Office) of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), as the Administrative Agent.

II. Purpose and Scope of the evaluation After two and half years of implementation, it is a requirement to conduct a mid-term review of the UNJPGE in order to assess its progress against outputs, management and coordination aspects to establish necessary follow up measures for implementation in the remaining period - 2012-2014. The over-arching aim is to assure that the program is still relevant and is on course to deliver on its intended results. Objectives The main objectives of the proposed review are to:

(i) Take stock of current programme achievements, challenges and opportunities; (ii) Verify the continued relevance (alignment with national needs) and pertinence of the programme as well as the

related sustainability of benefits thereof; (iii)Assess the programme design, objectives, strategies and implementation arrangements in light of changes in the

program context and the risks therein; (iv) Make recommendations on how to improve performance of the programme, and (v) Identify areas which implementing partners and program management should pay specific attention to in order to

achieve programme results. Scope of the evaluation The evaluation will specifically include: UN participating organizations. Main partners of UN participating organizations Specific sites for the evaluation will be further worked out by the respective UN agencies during the actual planning of

the evaluation process. Clients: The clients of the evaluation and main audience of the report are: Relevant staff in target ministries, local government and targeted government institutions, and participating CSOs. Relevant staff in participating UN-agencies. UN Women Technical units and head of Units in the participating UN-agencies. UN-agency Headquarters Development partners The outcome of the evaluation will be used for two purposes: To address challenges faced in implementing the programme and develop appropriate management, operational and

institutional responses to improve delivery on results over the remaining programming period. The lessons learnt and good practices will be shared with GoU stakeholders, UN partners, and relevant staff in

participating UN agencies, UN Women and other relevant stakeholders to be replicated in similar ongoing or future GEWE -related programmes.

Page 63 of 68

III. Key Evaluation Questions / analytical Framework:

The specific review questions and relevant evaluation instruments will be determined during the inception stage. The following questions shall guide the inquiry under the different aspects of the analytical framework. Relevance and strategic fit: Is the programme addressing the relevant needs in the country? Have new, more relevant needs emerged that the

programme should address? Are the stakeholders taking ownership of the programme concept? To what extent is the programme contributing to the national priorities stipulated in key documentation? Validity of the design: How the programme is aligned to the UNDAF and was a gender analysis conducted during the UNDAF or the development

of the UNJPGE. If undertaken, did the gender analysis offer good quality information on underlying causes of inequality to inform the UNJPGE design?

Are the planned programme outputs and results relevant and realistic for the situation on the ground? Do they need to be adapted to specific (local, sectoral etc.) needs or conditions?

Is the intervention logic coherent and realistic? What needs to be adjusted? (refer to the programme Results Matrix) o Do results causally link to the intended outputs (immediate outcomes) that link to broader impact(development goal)? o What are the main strategic components of the programme? How do they contribute and logically link to the planned

outcomes? How well do they link to each other? o Who are the partners of the programme? How strategic are partners in terms of mandate, influence, capacities and

commitment? How appropriate and useful are the indicators described in the programme document in assessing the programme's

progress? Are the targeted indicator values realistic and can they be tracked? If necessary, how should they be modified to be more useful? Are the means of verification for the indicators appropriate?

Efficiency: Have resources been used efficiently? Have activities supporting the strategy been cost-effective? Have programme funds and activities been delivered in a timely manner? If not, what were the bottlenecks encountered? Are there sufficient resources (financial, time, people) allocated to integrate human rights and gender equality in the

design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the UNJPGE? Are there any constraints (e.g. political, practical, and bureaucratic) to addressing human rights and gender equality

efficiently during implementation? What level of effort is made to overcome these challenges? Effectiveness: Is the programme making sufficient progress towards its planned outputs? Will the programme be likely to achieve its

planned results upon completion? Have the quantity and quality of the outputs produced so far been satisfactory? Do the benefits accrue equally to men and

women? How has the UNJPGE enhanced ownership and contributed to the development of national capacity? Are UN agencies working together more effectively? Sustainability: Does the intervention design include an appropriate sustainability and sustainability strategy (including promoting

national/local ownership, use of national capacity, etc.) to support positive changes in human rights and gender equality after the end of the intervention?

To what extent are stakeholders involved in the preparation of the sustainability strategy? To what degree are partners changing their policies or practices to improve human rights and gender equality fulfilment

(e.g. new services, greater responsiveness, resource re-allocation, improved quality etc.)? Coherence: To what degree are partners working towards the same results with a common understanding of the inter-relationship

between interventions? To what extent are approaches such as attention to gender, human rights based approach to programming and results

based management understood and pursued in a coherent fashion?

Page 64 of 68

Management and Coordination: How well are responsibilities delineated and implemented in a complementary fashion? How well have the coordination functions been fulfilled? Are management and implementation capacities (coordination, participating UN agencies, IPs) adequate? How effectively does the programme management monitor programme performance and results?

o Have appropriate means of verification for tracking progress, performance and achievement of indicator values been defined?

o Is relevant information and data systematically being collected and collated? o Is information being regularly analysed to feed into management decisions?

How (if at all) has the programme made strategic use of coordination and collaboration with other Joint Programmes to increase its effectiveness and impact?

Accordingly, the following analytical framework is suggested for the final report:

1. Title page (1 page) 2. Table of Contents (1 page) 3. Executive Summary (2 pages) 4. Acronyms (1 page) 5. Background and Programme Description (1-2 pages) 6. Purpose of the review (1 page) 7. Methodology and review process (1 page) 8. Findings, Analysis, Conclusions, and Recommendations (no more than 15 pages). This section's contentshould be

organized around the TOR questions, and include the findings, conclusions and recommendations for each of the subject areas to be evaluated

9. Lessons learned (1-2 pages) 10. Annexes: including the terms of reference, evaluation workplan and any other relevant documents. IV. Methodological approach

The evaluation methodology will be developed by the Evaluation Team and presented for approval to the Evaluation Steering Committee. The methodology should use a combination of quantitative and qualitative research methods that are appropriate to address the main evaluation questions. These methods should be applied with respect of human rights and gender equality principles and facilitate the engagement of key stakeholders. Measures will be taken to ensure data quality, validity and credibility of both primary and secondary data gathered and used in the evaluation. The evaluation will be carried following UN Evaluation Group (UNEG) Norms and Standards (see http://www.uneval.org/),UN Women Evaluation Policy as well as the Ethical Guidelines for evaluations in theUN system, see Annex to this TOR. In line with Norms and Standards a management response will be prepared for this evaluation as practical means to enhance the use of evaluation findings and follow-up to the evaluation recommendations. The management response will identify who is responsible, what are the action points and the deadlines. The consultants are expected to: (i) Present and discuss an Inception Report with the Evaluation Steering Committee. This report should include, but not limited to:

Interpretation of the Terms of Reference Detailed Work Plan Schedule – Detailed Data Collection Methodology Data Collection Tools –

(ii) Conduct desk review - collect and analyze:

UNJPGE programme document; Data submitted by UN agencies and implementing partners; Participating UN Organization’s programme annual work plans, reports, studies and other pertinent documents; Progress against the UNJPGE outputs and outcomes and indicators; 2010 and 2011 UNJPGE Annual Review Reports and other related documents.

(iii) Conduct participatory processes in the review:

Meet with members of the Joint Steering Committee, GRG members, other programme staff to solicit input and feedback into the review;

http://www.uneval.org/

http://www.uneval.org/

Page 65 of 68

Conduct field visits to validate reported results in the 2010 and 2011 UNJPGE annual review reports; Conduct Agency and outcome/based meetings with UN agencies, outcome leads and partners at Kampala and field

levels to clarify on the evaluation focus of each results area and validate findings and interpretations.

(iv) Involve senior management of the UNJPGE: Discuss findings with the RC during the review process; Present and discuss findings with the Joint Steering Committee.

(v) Document best practices/success stories from participating UN agencies and implementing partners on how the

programme activities are contributing to increased and improved gender equality in access to services and opportunities.

Documents that will be shared with the evaluators

UNJPGE programme document UNDAF 2010-2014 UNJPGE results Matrix UNJPGE Performance Monitoring Framework Joint Monitoring reports 2010 and 2011 UNJPGE Annual Review Reports and other related documents. Programme work plans Progress reports (and presentations on progress and achievements) Interim reports Publications and promotional materials Reports on specific activities Documents related to programme achievements

V. Main Outputs of the Evaluation The evaluators will be expected to deliver:

1. Inception report that includes a detailed evaluation design outlining key questions, data collection and analysis methods – this framework should be developed in a participatory manner- (the evaluator and the evaluation committee will work closely ) before commencement of the actual review

2. A draft report for review by Participating UN Agencies and main partners 3. A second draft report incorporating comments made on the first draft. 4. Power point presentation for dissemination purpose 5. To further promote learning and the exchange of experiences, a dissemination strategy will be developed for

sharing lessons learnt and good practices from this review with UN partners, GoU stakeholders, relevant staff in participating UN-agencies, UN Women and other relevant stakeholders.

6. One or two success stories to be included in the UN Resident Coordinator’s Annual Report 2012 as separate Annexes to the final report according to a given format.

7. Observations Report that documents the review process so that the process can be improved in the succeeding UNJPGE reviews.

8. As annexes to the final report: i. Terms of Reference.

ii. Updated and/or revised Results Matrix. iii. List of documents reviewed. iv. List of UN agencies, implementing partners and staff consulted.

VI. Management Arrangements, work plan and time frame

In line with UN Evaluation Group Norms and Standards, an Evaluation Steering Committee will be constituted to serve as sounding board and consultative body to ensure the active involvement of stakeholders. The evaluation committee will help to:

Provide a more balanced picture of views and perceptions regarding the progress of the UNUNJPGE. Make the evaluation more relevant through influencing not only the way the evaluation process is designed

and implemented, but also the possible consequences and utilization of the evaluation.

Page 66 of 68

Prompt primary users of the evaluation and other stakeholders into action during and after the evaluation. Each participating Agency will appoint an evaluation focal person. The evaluators will thus be able to ask for any support and reports directly to the evaluation focal persons of the programme. The Evaluation committee will serve as the primary contact with the evaluation team. The Committee will consist of members from the Gender Reference Group (GRG), the UNJPGEGE coordinator, UN WOMEN M&E Officer and UN Women Regional Evaluation Specialist. The Committee will assist key aspects of the evaluation process such as drafting and finalising ToR, selecting evaluators, review of preliminary report, establishing dissemination plan and implementation of recommendation strategy. It will also provide a technical guidance throughout the evaluation process and facilitate the evaluators’ engagement with relevant stakeholders. The Committee will also coordinate the primary data collection. Prior to the evaluation, the Committee will discuss with the evaluators the TORs and criteria for a good quality evaluation as outlined in the international norms, standards and guidelines quoted above. Upon the completion of the review, the Committee will meet the evaluators to discuss whether the agreed upon criteria have been fulfilled. The Committee will give approval for the final evaluation report. The evaluation coordinating agency, UN Women in consultation with the RC will provide the necessary guidance on the process and in reviewing the draft report. The review will be done in 25 working days in November/December 2012. Accountabilities UN WOMEN will be accountable for coordination of stakeholders’ involved, organizing field-visits, focus groups, providing translator/interpreter and other logistical issues.

VII. Evaluation team This assignment will be done by a team of two people: one international consultant and one national consultant. Core values / guiding principles: The evaluators will adhere to the following core values and guiding principles:

Integrity: Demonstrating consistency in upholding and promoting the values of UN Women in actions and decisions, in line with the UN Code of Conduct.

Cultural Sensitivity/Valuing diversity: Demonstrating an appreciation of the multicultural nature of the organization and the diversity of its staff. Demonstrating an international outlook, appreciating differences in values and learning from cultural diversity.

Specific competencies:

Ability and experience in leading Evaluations. Knowledge of issues concerning governance, women's rights and gender equality. Specific knowledge in the area of democratic governance, economic empowerment, GBV and/or gender

mainstreaming. Excellent facilitation and communication skills and the ability to conduct and document. Experience with focus group discussions and key informant interviews. Ability to deal with multi-stakeholder groups. Ability to write focused evaluation reports. Wide experience in quantitative and qualitative data collection methods. Willingness and ability to travel to the different project sites in the country. Ability to work in a team. Fluent in English Ability to manage and supervise the evaluation team and ensure timely submission of quality evaluation reports

within deadline. Required Background and Experience

International consultant National consultant

Advanced Degree in Social Sciences, Advanced Degree in Social Sciences,

Page 67 of 68

Development Studies or other relevant field Development Studies or other relevant field

and with formal research skills. and with formal research skills.

At least 7 years experience in conducting At least 5 years experience in conducting

evaluations as team leader evaluations

High proficiency in English Fluent in English

Ability to manage and supervise evaluation Familiarity with the UN joint programming, UN

teams and ensure timely submission of quality agencies, mandates, programmes and

evaluation reports activities.

Experience in leading complex evaluations e.g. Solid knowledge of the UN system including

of UN Joint Programs, Delivering as One etc. the UN agencies and policy frameworks in

Uganda.

Experience working in Uganda and Knowledge

of Uganda political and social culture,

policies/laws and programmes is an asset.

VIII. Applying for the consultancy

Applicants are required to submit an expression of interest to undertake the assignment/consultancy and include the following:

Cover letter stating why you want to do this work, your capacity and experience and available start date. It should also indicate whether you apply for the International or National consultancy Detailed CV (UN Women P11)- this can be down- loaded from the UNWOMEN website

Applications with the above details should be sending to [email protected]; [email protected] [email protected]

Applications must be sent by 3rd October 2012 ANNEX: ETHICAL CODE OF CONDUCT FOR THE EVALUATION

It is expected that the evaluators will respect the Ethical Code of Conduct of the UN Evaluation Group (UNEG). These are: • Independence: Evaluators shall ensure that independence of judgment is maintained and that evaluation findings and recommendations are independently presented. • Impartiality: Evaluators shall operate in an impartial and unbiased manner and give a balancedpresentation of strengths and weaknesses of the policy, program, project or organizational unit being evaluated. • Conflict of Interest: Evaluators are required to disclose in writing any past experience, which may giverise to a potential conflict of interest, and to deal honestly in resolving any conflict of interest which may arise. • Honesty and Integrity: Evaluators shall show honesty and integrity in their own behaviour, negotiatinghonestly the evaluation costs, tasks, limitations, scope of results likely to be obtained, while accurately presenting their procedures, data and findings and highlighting any limitations or uncertainties of interpretation within the evaluation. • Competence: Evaluators shall accurately represent their level of skills and knowledge and work onlywithin the limits of their professional training and abilities in evaluation, declining assignments for which they do not have the skills and experience to complete successfully. • Accountability: Evaluators are accountable for the completion of the agreed evaluation deliverableswithin the timeframe and budget agreed, while operating in a cost effective manner.

mailto:[email protected]




Page 68 of 68

• Obligations to Participants: Evaluators shall respect and protect the rights and welfare of humansubjects and communities, in accordance with the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other human rights conventions. Evaluators shall respect differences in culture, local customs, religious beliefs and practices, personal interaction, gender roles, disability, age and ethnicity, while using evaluation instruments appropriate to the cultural setting. Evaluators shall ensure prospective participants are treated as autonomous agents, free to choose whether to participate in the evaluation, while ensuring that the relatively powerless are represented. • Confidentiality: Evaluators shall respect people’s right to provide information in confidence and makeparticipants aware of the scope and limits of confidentiality, while ensuring that sensitive information cannot be traced to its source. • Avoidance of Harm: Evaluators shall act to minimize risks and harms to, and burdens on, thoseparticipating in the evaluation, without compromising the integrity of the evaluation findings. • Accuracy, Completeness and Reliability: Evaluators have an obligation to ensure that evaluationreports and presentations are accurate, complete and reliable. Evaluators shall explicitly justify judgments, findings and conclusions and show their underlying rationale, so that stakeholders are in a position to assess them. • Transparency: Evaluators shall clearly communicate to stakeholders the purpose of the evaluation, thecriteria applied and the intended use of findings. Evaluators shall ensure that stakeholders have a say in shaping the evaluation and shall ensure that all documentation is readily available to and understood by stakeholders. • Omissions and wrongdoing: Where evaluators find evidence of wrong-doing or unethical conduct, theyare obliged to report it to the proper oversight authority.