appropriateness of sub-programme objectives and strategy. It analysed the clarity
and coherence of the CCSP’s vision, objectives and intervention strategy, within the
changing global, regional and national context, and the evolving overall mandate
and comparative advantages of UNEP. Second, the evaluation assessed the overall
performance of the CCSP in terms of effectiveness (i.e. achievement of outcomes),
sustainability, up-scaling and catalytic effects. It also reviewed the potential or
likelihood that outcomes were leading towards impact. Which outcomes were
assessed, was determined by a reconstruction of the sub-programme’s Theory of
Change (see below). Third, the evaluation examined the factors affecting performance in more detail: intervention design issues, organizational aspects, partnerships etc. that affected the overall performance of the sub-programme.
These areas of focus were not addressed in sequence but simultaneously as they
are strongly linked to each other and dynamic as shown in Fig. 6.1. For instance,
elements of strategic relevance of UNEP’s involvement in Climate Change determine the scope and scale of the sub-programme and shape the kinds of products,
services and delivery mechanisms are used to reach core objectives. Decisions
surrounding strategic relevance of the CCSP thereby also influence the administrative, management and implementation structure, and other factors that affect
performance. Sub-programme performance, in turn, affects funding availability
and programme orientation. Progress made on expected accomplishments and
impact also changes the priority needs of countries and other stakeholders, justifying strategic adjustments to sub-programme objectives and strategies.
Factors affecting
performance
Program & project design
Organisation & management
Human & financial resources
Collaboration & partnerships
M&E
Sub-program
performance
Effectiveness
Likelihood of impact
Sustainability
Upscaling
Efficiency
Fig. 6.1 Three interlinked areas of focus of the evaluation (Source: Author)
102
M. Carbon
and coherence of the CCSP’s vision, objectives and intervention strategy, within the
changing global, regional and national context, and the evolving overall mandate
and comparative advantages of UNEP. Second, the evaluation assessed the overall
performance of the CCSP in terms of effectiveness (i.e. achievement of outcomes),
sustainability, up-scaling and catalytic effects. It also reviewed the potential or
likelihood that outcomes were leading towards impact. Which outcomes were
assessed, was determined by a reconstruction of the sub-programme’s Theory of
Change (see below). Third, the evaluation examined the factors affecting performance in more detail: intervention design issues, organizational aspects, partnerships etc. that affected the overall performance of the sub-programme.
These areas of focus were not addressed in sequence but simultaneously as they
are strongly linked to each other and dynamic as shown in Fig. 6.1. For instance,
elements of strategic relevance of UNEP’s involvement in Climate Change determine the scope and scale of the sub-programme and shape the kinds of products,
services and delivery mechanisms are used to reach core objectives. Decisions
surrounding strategic relevance of the CCSP thereby also influence the administrative, management and implementation structure, and other factors that affect
performance. Sub-programme performance, in turn, affects funding availability
and programme orientation. Progress made on expected accomplishments and
impact also changes the priority needs of countries and other stakeholders, justifying strategic adjustments to sub-programme objectives and strategies.
Factors affecting
performance
Program & project design
Organisation & management
Human & financial resources
Collaboration & partnerships
M&E
Sub-program
performance
Effectiveness
Likelihood of impact
Sustainability
Upscaling
Efficiency
Fig. 6.1 Three interlinked areas of focus of the evaluation (Source: Author)
102
M. Carbon