1 / 24

Progress on development and management results

Progress on development and management results. 19 March 2013. Development results. Overview of DRF Indicators.

cailin-barr
Download Presentation

Progress on development and management results

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Progress on development and management results 19 March 2013

  2. Development results

  3. Overview of DRF Indicators • Outcome indicators: Modest progress since 2010, partly because of the short time to show changes in high level outcome indicators such as maternal mortality or contraceptive prevalence • Output indicators: UNFPA achieved almost all 2012 targets: 25 out of 27 • However, there are two caveats to this: • A number of indicators are not robust and not well benchmarked • A number of targets were poorly set, which required increasing targets initially in the MTR for 12 indicators based on 2011 results

  4. Overview of DRF Indicators (cont.) Key lessons learned and implications for the next results framework • Better indicator definition: Output indicators need to be well benchmarked to determine, for instance, going beyond indicators that simply specify “ number of countries supported” to introduce quality standards • Introduction of indicators that capture interim outcomes: Between indicators of institutional or behavior change and output indicators of goods and services delivered, there needs to be indicators that capture outcomes that are more directly sensitive to the outputs; for example, outcomes indicators that measure changes in the capacity built • Target setting: Building on the experience from the MTR, target setting could be improved by a process that is more bottom up

  5. DRF Outcome Indicators : Improved,  : unchanged, : deteriorated

  6. DRF Outcome Indicators (cont.) /a Not comparable with baseline due to changes to improve data collection methodology. : Improved,  : unchanged, : deteriorated

  7. DRF Outcome Indicators (cont.) : Improved,  : unchanged, : deteriorated

  8. DRF Output indicators (Outcome 1) Note: DRF output indicators are cumulative unless otherwise specified. /a Provisional. /b Target value have been increased based on analysis of 2011 country office annual report data. /c Indicator is not cumulative. Values are for the year reported only.

  9. DRF Output Indicators (Outcome 2) /a Values changed to include South Sudan. /b Indicator is not cumulative. Values are for the year reported only. /c Target value have been increased based on analysis of 2011 country office annual report data.

  10. DRF Output Indicators (Outcome 3) /a Target value has been increased based on analysis of 2011 country office annual report data.

  11. DRF Output Indicators (Outcome 4) /a Number of countries changed as number of priority countries under the UNAIDS strategy has been increased. /b Target value has been increased based on analysis of 2011 country office annual report data. /c Baseline and targets values changed as indicator definition changed. /d Values reported for this indicator refer to number of countries.

  12. DRF Output Indicators (Outcome 5) /a Target value has been increased based on analysis of 2011 country office annual report data. /b Baseline value has been revised to reflect 2008-2010 cumulative data.

  13. DRF Output Indicators (Outcome 6) /a Baseline value has been revised using data from 2011 country office annual report data. /b Target value has been increased based on analysis of 2011 country office annual report data.

  14. DRF Output Indicators (Outcome 7) /a Provisional. /b Target value has been increased based on analysis of 2011 country office annual report data.

  15. Management results

  16. Introduction • This is a summary of Management Results, showing progress made and remaining challenges since the MTR • The MRF’s 14 indicators are presented under the following subthemes: • Programme Effectiveness • Stewardship of Resources • Human Resources • Resource Mobilization

  17. Highlights • Following organizational alignment since the 2011 MTR, a number of institutional reforms to support the process have been introduced • So far, there are strong signs of positive change across the Fund • Not all targets have been met but overall the trends support significant improvement in UNFPA

  18. All trends show improvements, including areas where targets are missed Status Trends • Met target/Good progress • Stable • Missed target/Decline • Data missing

  19. Uneven performance across outputs against targets Status

  20. …similar case with the trends but encouraging Trends

  21. MRF Indicators: Overview

  22. MRF Indicators: Overview (continued)

  23. MRF Indicators: Overview (continued)

  24. MRF Indicators: Overview (continued)

More Related