Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) are essential for accountability and learning from the UNDAF. They are the basis on which the UN system assesses and makes transparent its contribution to the achievement of national priorities and the SDGs. They help the United Nations ensure that it is delivering on the commitment to leave no one behind, and that its support is primarily reaching those who are most disadvantaged. Anticipated M&E activities during the UNDAF cycle are laid out in a costed M&E plan.

Monitoring takes place continuously to track progress towards anticipated results, and checks if the theory of change identified at the design stage is still valid or needs to be reviewed. Building on identified data needs and baselines established during the CCA, monitoring helps the UN system and partners to prioritize, learn, make course corrections and communicate these to stakeholders. It incorporates attention to programme and operational bottlenecks.[23]

The UNDAF should be regularly monitored against the programming principles and approaches in each stage of the programming cycle. As part of the annual review process, the One UN Country Results Report, based on existing evidence, demonstrates how the UNDAF:

  • Contributes to the implementation of the 2030 Agenda, the SDGs and recommendations by UN human rights mechanisms;
  • Reaches those left furthest behind first, and contributes to the reduction of inequalities and discrimination;
  • Is inclusive, participatory and transparent, and enables stakeholders to hold the UN system accountable for results;
  • Addresses risks and resilience;
  • Is based on a valid theory of change, whereby assumptions on how UN programmes affect development change are confirmed and revised in light of changes in the context;
  • Contributes to developing the capacity of duty-bearers to meet their obligations and rights-holders to claim their rights;
  • Enhances coherence between the development, humanitarian, human rights, peace and security, and environmental agendas;
  • Contributes to fostering new and effective partnerships between national stakeholders and international actors, including through South-South and triangular cooperation;
  • Promotes integrated and coherent policy support to partners;
  • Contributes to strengthening national capacities to collect and analyse data for policy-making and reporting.

UNDAF evaluations are external and a minimum requirement of a quality UNDAF process. They are conducted once in the UNDAF life cycle, with timing coordinated among UN entities so that organizational or programme evaluations can contribute to them. UNDAF evaluations assess whether planned UNDAF results were achieved, whether they made a worthwhile and durable contribution to national development processes and delivered on the commitment to leave no one behind, whether this was done in a cost-efficient manner and whether results built on the United Nations’ collective comparative advantage (rather than that of individual agencies) in a coherent manner. UNDAF evaluations also assess the extent to which UN interventions contribute to the four UNDAF programming principles.

An UNDAF evaluation supports institutional learning on what works and does not work, where, when and why, and provides information that contributes more broadly to the evidence base for policy approaches backed by the UN system. It serves as the foundation for subsequent UNDAF planning processes. UNDAF evaluations and management responses issued by the UNCT are prepared in line with the UNEG Norms and Standards on Evaluation.

At the country level, an inter-agency M&E group supports the planning and coordination of joint monitoring and evaluation efforts, including the coordination of data collection, provision of coherent M&E advice, capacity strengthening, and sharing of monitoring and evaluation information. In doing so, it draws upon expertise from across the UN system, acknowledging that organization-specific monitoring and evaluation practices will complement the UNDAF monitoring and evaluation work. The M&E support group works closely with the Results Groups and in some cases is an integral part of them. In UN mission settings, M&E groups work with mission staff to ensure coherence. In humanitarian settings, the groups link as much as possible with humanitarian response monitoring frameworks and systems.

Monitoring and evaluation of the UNDAF contributes to strengthening national data collection systems, including by improving data quality, analysis and use with regards to monitoring progress on national SDG targets, and consistency with global SDG monitoring. Building on and strengthening existing national data and information systems help ensure national ownership as well as sustainability.

Increasingly, the United Nations undertakes joint real-time monitoring activities to support data collection, gauge perceptions from national stakeholders on progress towards UNDAF outcomes, monitor risks and test the continued relevance of the theory of change. A monitoring platform such as DevInfo/ (UNINFO) can support the transparency of data and provide information for reporting. The companion guide on monitoring and evaluation lays out the different steps in detail.

[23] Bottlenecks are blockages that may be related to supply or demand (e.g., knowledge of services, behavioural factors that influence people’s ability to access available services), the quality of services, or social values, legislative frameworks, finances or management influencing a sector or area. For more, see the UNDG Guidance on Frequent Monitoring for Equity.

Related Blogs and Country stories

Silo Fighters Blog

Preparing for the Future(s): Foresight, citizens’ insights and serious games

BY Ana Dautovic, Marija Novkovic | October 20, 2015

Most people feel that the future is linear: if you perform well in school, you’ll get a job; if you work hard, you’ll be promoted; if you save, you’ll be able to live well through your retirement age, et cetera, et cetera. There is a great level of comfort in the IF → THEN causal link because there are fewer variables, fewer elements that could go off the rails. There is more certainty and we feel more in control. However, through Futures Studies there are alternative futures (possible, probable, plausible, and preferred); consequently, there are multiple development pathways. Professor Jim Dator, the pioneer of modern futures studies once said that “the future cannot be predicted because the future does not exist.” Indeed, the last few years brought forward unfathomable changes with deep, far-reaching ramifications. The global financial crisis, earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, nuclear power plant disasters, the rise of extremism, and the ongoing global refugee crisis, to name just a few. The linear path from A (The Past) to B (The Now) to C (The Future) in these occurrences has been more challenging, if not impossible, to pin down. Because of the rapid pace of changes, development organizations are, in fact, asked to be more resilient and more agile so as to navigate uncertainties. We in the UN System in Montenegro were mindful of the fact that the realities of the present day and age require innovation at the highest point of impact – the five-year strategic plan of support to the country. We created a strategy that would infuse our long-term planning with foresight and civic engagement. It consists of three steps. 1. Serious games for empowering new voices in strategic planning Working in Montenegro over the last few years has brought us closer to the country's rising new voices -- a generation witnessing and creating unprecedented changes to the social fabric. Working across think-thanks, academia, statistical office and NGOs, they are disruptive innovators, digital champions and active youth. We engaged them through collaborative workshops, where they learned about foresight, and most importantly, created alternative futures for Montenegro. We are particularly proud to have used a serious game that was custom-made for Montenegro by John A. Sweeney, another member of the Hawaii Research Center for Futures Studies and deputy director of the Center for Postnormal Policy and Futures Studies. The game, beautifully designed to showcase elements of the national costume, served as an enhanced survey tool, prompting the players to ponder on values, challenges, opportunities, stakeholders and actions, which will likely shape the future of the country. 2. Digital engagement fit for the 21st century Civic engagement, particularly through social innovation and online platforms, has been high on UN Montenegro’s agenda. So far, we’ve engaged thousands of Montenegrins and garnered their insights through the massive post-2015 national consultations (12,000 people), the Youth Employment Solutions platform (10,700 people), and uncovered social change heroes through the Open Ideas and Be Responsible campaigns (over 7000 civic reports of informal economy leading to generating public revenue in excess of 1 million EUR). However, public consultations on the next five-year strategic plan of collaboration between the UN and the Government of Montenegro were the new peak we had to conquer. We turned to digital technologies, and moved our serious game into the online space, hoping for a wider outreach. We are both anxious and excited about receiving citizens’ insights into the future! 3. Innovating at the point of strategic prioritization While this summer seemed like one giant roller-coaster journey, we do have few more rides ahead of us! Moving away from traditional planning processes, we are bringing in foresight into strategic planning with the Government. Applying foresight should allow us to unlock a much broader scope of analysis.  We plan to use backcasting, i.e. a forward looking planning process where we start from future(s) scenarios to define programmes that will help make them a reality. This strategic meeting with the government will be as collaborative and hands-on as possible, to inspire everyone to engage more than they would by filling out a survey or validating pre-defined strategic priorities. It will enable considering new horizons of the five-year plan, the integrated nature of sustainable development and human rights, and creating a more resilient society. Thinking critically about preferred futures will lead the way towards creating a more fluid and agile structure so that when challenges arise, we can navigate them. This approach will ultimately promote proactive versus reactive attitudes. In our next blog post, we will share what we have learned so far. Stay tuned, check out the video feature, and join the ride!

Silo Fighters Blog

Now is the best time to embrace the futures: SDGs success depends on strategic foresight

BY Cat Tully | September 28, 2016

2016 is a unique, exciting time for the global development agenda. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are now underway and UN country teams face the huge task of implementing them. So, who will get the best outcomes by 2030? My money is on countries that use strategic foresight. This blog will explain why, and how. Foresight Foresight is a form of strategic planning that enables us to think about futures*. We will never have hard data about what might happen in years to come, but in a volatile and rapidly changing world foresight can provide us with principles for understanding complexity, building resilience and setting direction. Foresight is essential to achieving development goals because it enables us to implement policies based on a thorough and informed approach, as opposed to a set of assumptions. Foresight and the UN As the SDG agenda fires up, we embark on an entirely new policymaking approach, and UN country teams have the exciting opportunity to become leaders in the field of emergent strategic planning. This positions the UN in a unique, if not daunting role: to support communities and countries globally to implement strategic foresight. So how do we begin? Foresight is not something that can be added on top of existing structures; it can’t be thrown in as a tick-box exercise. If we want robust development policies, the UN must embed foresight within UNDAF processes. This requires gradual, structural change in order to be successful. First and foremost, decision makers must make sure processes are emergent. This means that they are participative, with governments acting as facilitators of other actors, as opposed to top-down controllers. In general, there are five key principles of emergent strategic planning that stand any organisation in good stead: Examine the strategic context. Analyse trends and drivers of possible futures contexts, along different time horizons, e.g. one year, five years and 15 years, so it can inform but not be captured by budget and operational planning decisions. Openly engage with a wide set of views. Seek the opinions of the public, especially vulnerable and extremely poor citizens (i.e. the key “beneficiaries” of development policy design). Look at a set of issues with multiple lenses. Diversity and alternative perspectives are important for understanding and identifying weak signals, as well as developing common knowledge and ownership. Identify possible futures and trends. This includes trends that are desired or otherwise, that can be highlighted either through complete pictures of scenarios or snapshots. Build on policy implications. Reviewing what genuine strategic alternatives look like, and enabling resilience as well as pushing for desired outcomes. Being emergent is vital. In our uncertain world where we face big, long-term threats like climate change, traditional policymaking and government structures fall short. The role of government is shifting and in order to effectively plan for the future in a strategic way, governments must move from being commanding controllers to “system stewards”.** The UN plays a key role in making this happen. System stewards facilitate a network of multiple actors with different perspectives: they guide an emergent, inclusive policy-planning process, which effectively plans for and responds to opportunities and risks. System stewardship is the only sustainable alternative to the traditional command-and-control government structure that currently fails to deliver for citizens. The role of the UN in transforming government The SDGs actually mandate the UN to transform the role of government in this way: SDG 16 demands “effective, accountable and inclusive institutions”. This is effectively describing a system stewardship model, but as you can imagine, this won’t happen automatically. Governments must first build the capacity to use strategic foresight to take the longer-term into account, and the UN is in the perfect position to help make this happen. If implemented properly, SDG 16 has the exciting potential to transform the role of government for the long-term. System stewardship will enable governments to navigate an increasingly complex world, whilst keeping citizens at the centre of processes and long-term plans that genuinely work. Ultimately, the success of the SDGs depends on our ability to start using foresight as soon as possible. The UN must seize this intervention point to strengthen governments as stewards, and ensure wider participation is integrated into strategic planning processes. Foresight resources Everything in this blog comes from a recent guide on how the UN Development Assistance Frameworks process can make better use of foresight. It was informed by consultations with development professionals (both within and outside the UN) and provides tools for improving processes and introducing strategic foresight into UNDAF. The guide also includes examples of foresight and other public sector innovations to improve multi-year strategic planning, as well as case studies from UN in-country teams (Laos, Montenegro and Rwanda) who have begun to apply foresight to their UNDAF planning process. To discover how to apply foresight, and to access a list of practical resources, download the guide here. *We speak of “futures” in the plural, because there are many different alternatives for where the world might be in the next five, ten or 50 years. **See Tully, C. Stewardship of the Future. Using Strategic Foresight in 21st Century Governance.  2015.