UNEG/DAC Peer Reviews of United Nations evaluation systems - Reports

Professional Peer Review of the Evaluation Function of UNESCO

January 2020

This Professional Peer Review of the evaluation function of UNESCO was carried out under the provisions contained in the United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG) Framework for Professional Peer Reviews of the Evaluation Function of UN organizations. It is the first Peer Review of UNESCO’s evaluation function and was carried out at the request of UNESCO.

Professional Peer Review of the Evaluation Function of UNICEF

December 2017

The assessment aimed at analysing the function against the three core principles of Independence, Credibility and Utility. The scope included both the strategic positioning of evaluation in UNICEF and its functioning at an operational level, at the central and decentralized levels. The core assessment question was: “Are the agency’s evaluation policy, function and its products: independent; credible; useful and influential for learning and accountability purposes, as assessed by a Panel of professional evaluation peers against the UNEG Norms and Standards and the evidence base?” The Peer Review was to be forward-looking, providing guidance on how the evaluation function can be further strengthened to meet emergingchallenges and opportunities both within the UN system and more broadly.

Management Response

Professional Peer Review of the Evaluation Function of International Trade Centre 

April 2017

This professional peer review "undertakes an assessment of the independence, credibility and utility of ITC’s evaluation function, focusing on quality, use and follow-up of evaluation across the ITC to promote accountability,learning, and improvement." 

Management Response

Professional Peer Review of the Evaluation Function of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime

April 2017

The Peer Review focused, following the standard framework, on the independence, credibility and utility of the UNODC evaluation function. The main purpose was defined as “...to help UNODC to ensure that its evaluation function is well positioned and equipped to make the best contribution to the work of the organization, and those it serves.” The Panel was also asked to assess UNODC evaluation and accountability culture and IEU’s engagement with UNEG and UN-system wide evaluation processes.

Multilateral effectiveness: Professional Peer Review of the UNRWA Evaluation Function report 2016

March 2016

This Professional Peer Review of the evaluation function of UNRWA was carried out under the provisions contained in the United Nations Evaluation Group Framework for Professional Peer Reviews of the Evaluation Function of UN organizations. It is the first Peer Review of UNRWA's evaluation function and was carried out at the request of UNRWA.

Multilateral effectiveness: Management Response to the Professional Peer Review of the UNRWA Evaluation Function 2016

Peer Review Evaluation Function of the UN World Food Programme 2008-2013  -  Annexes

October 2014

The independent Peer Review of WFP's evaluation function was conducted to assess the independence, credibility and utility of WFP's evaluation function. In view of the many changes in WFP's internal and external context, in addition to reviewing progress since the 2007 review it assessed the quality, use and follow up to evaluations across WFP for accountability, learning and improvement. The final report sets out strategic choices facing WFP for its central and decentralized evaluation function and makes a number of recommendations to management, OEV and the board - the response to which will set the strategic direction for evaluation in WFP for the coming years.

October 2014

The panel was impressed by what the Independent Evaluation Offic has achieved. The panel identified a number of areas that may require attention in order to harvest the full potential of the evaluation function. It found that the Independent Evaluation Office efforts to ensure the accountability function of evaluation were more successful than efforts to ensure the learning dimension. As such, the panel agrees with the Independent Evaluation Office self-assessment prepared for this review, which identified learning as the challenge for the future.

September 2014

This peer review report presents the panel's observations and conclusions as well as its recommendations to the Independent Evaluation Office, the management and the executive board of UN Women with a view to strengthening the evaluation function of UN Women. It focuses on communicating in succinct fashion what the panel considers to be the key overall results of its deliberations, as well its advice for further improving evaluation in UN Women.

May 2013

This report presents the findings, analysis, conclusions and recommendations of the study of peer reviews of UN evaluation functions, which was conducted from mid­-January to end of March 2013. A preface from Chairs of UNEG and DAC Evalnet is also included.

Peer review of UNDP's Evaluation Office on Methodology and Knowledge Sharing

January 2013

The panel found that the Evaluation Office is professional and strong and has a high degree of independence. There are many good skills in the team and there is an excellent engagement with management and the board. From this strong position the Office has opportunities to further strengthen its strategic role in UNDP.

March 2012

The Review found that, generally, evaluations conducted were balanced, producing reports of good quality and that the evaluations carried out had been found to be useful. However, there is presently no Evaluation Policy in place and no clear definition of roles and responsibilities for planning, managing and conducting evaluations.

‌

Peer Review of the Evaluation Function of the United Nations Environment Programme 

March 2012

While human resources seem insufficient to deal with the high demand for its services and to carry out mandatory project as well as strategic evaluations, the peer review panel recognized the efforts made in the last few years to strengthen the Evaluation office.

Peer Review of the Evaluation Function of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO)

March 2010

“This approach has several purposes: building greater knowledge, confidence and use of evaluation systems by management, governing bodies and others; providing a suitable way of ‘evaluating the evaluators’; sharing good practice, experience and mutual learning.”

Peer Review of the Evaluation function of the Global Environment Facility (GEF)

2009

The Peer Review examined the GEF evaluation function on three core criteria: independence of the GEF-EO and of its evaluation processes, credibility and utility of its evaluations. 

- GEF Management Response to the UNEG-DAC Peer Review

‌

2009

This report is the result of the fifth professional peer review of the evaluation function at a multilateral organization. It was carried out at the request of OIOS to the DAC Network on Evaluation. The aim of this review is to stimulate constructive peer exchange about possible improvements in the evaluation function.

Peer Review of the Evaluation Function at the World Food Programme (WFP)

2007

This report is the result of the third professional peer review of the evaluation function at a multilateral organisation. It was carried out at the request of WFP to the DAC Network on Evaluation and the UN Evaluation Group (UNEG).

Peer Review of the Evaluation Function at United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) 

2006

The OECD/DAC Network on Development Evaluation designed a process of peer review of the evaluation function of multilateral organizations as an alternative to costly institutional evaluations conducted by donors. UNICEF was the second pilot following a first test with UNDP.

2005

Who evaluates the evaluator? Occasionally the independence, credibility and utility of evaluation are challenged both by those being evaluated and by the users of evaluation, who may often be the same.

This framework builds on the Framework for Professional Peer Reviews developed by the collaborative task team of UNEG and the Evaluation Network (2007).