Mid-term Evaluation Power Point Presentation

Report
CIVIL SOCIETY
ENGAGEMENT IN
UNCAC
STRENGTHENING THE CAPACITY OF CIVIL
SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONS IN AFRICA TO
COMBAT CORRUPTION AND CONTRIBUTE
TO THE UNCAC REVIEW PROCESS
(UNODC, GLOU 68)
INDEPENDENT EVALUATION PRESENTATION
BY
MS. FATIHA SEROUR, INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR
28 AUGUST 2013
OUTLINE
1. Why Civil Society Engagement in UNCAC?
-Introduction
2. How was this carried out? - Process
3. With What? Funding & support
4. What results were achieved? Evaluation
5. Way forward: Conclusions &
Recommendations
Why Civil Society Engagement in UNCAC?
 Premise: “Corruption undermines democracy and
the rule of law, leads to violations of human
rights..” (K. Annan), and that:
 UNODC regards Civil Society engagement as an
integral part of the fight against corruption 
 The fight against corruption is a collective
responsibility involving Member States as leaders
& other stakeholders incl. Civil Society
Organizations (CSOs) (art. 13 of UNCAC) role &
responsibility that needed support
How was this carried out? - Process
 2005: UNCAC came into force  CSOs’ meaningful
engagement needed strengthening through capacity
development  various initiatives, eg.:
 Strengthening the Capacity of Civil Society
Organizations in Africa to Combat Corruption
and Contribute to the UNCAC Review Process
(part of GLOU 68: Looking Beyond: Towards a
Strategic Engagement with Civil Society on
Anti-Corruption, and Drugs and Crime
Prevention”  aims to “strengthen UNODC
partnerships with CSOs”.
How was this carried out? - Process
 3 specific objectives for the anti-corruption module:
 Increased CSO knowledge of UNCAC & its Review
Mechanism & ability to contribute meaningfully
 Increased dialogue bet. CSOs & their gvt focal points to
discuss contributions to the process & build CSOs’
capacity for replicating the training in their country;
 CSOs gaining skills & resources to work closely with
the private sector in the UNCAC review mechanism …
this includes a small grants programme for CSOs to
engage directly with the private sector.
How was this carried out? - Process
 4 Trainings (2 in Africa and 2 in Laxenburg,




conducted between 2011 and 2013); 1 day
workshop in Brasilia
Over 140 CSOs (from Africa and selected countries
in other regions) were trained to date.
Training materials (printed and audio-visual)
produced
Other training replicated.
10 grants to CSOs to engage with the private sector.
With What? Funding & support
 Total Funding 2010 to date: US$ 1,709,743 ( UK-
DfID; Austria-ADA; Australia-AusAid)
ADA contributed 60 per cent of the above total to
support activities in Africa according to its
strategic focus and mandate.
 Additional Contributions: Switzerland (US$
21,837) and Norway (US$ 70,605).
What results were achieved?
Evaluation Objectives & Methodology
 Objectives: “ To measure the results achieved so
far by bringing CSOs up to speed with UNCAC &
its review mechanism & how it has facilitated
engagement between CSOs & the respective
governments on the prevention & fight against
corruption’
 Focus: relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact
 Methodology: desk review, formal/informal
meetings & semi-structured interviews (strategic &
operational issues) with various stakeholders
(national & international level).
What results were achieved?
Key Findings
 SWOT:
 Main strengths (a) creation of a dialogue platform for
exchange &engagement between gvts, CSOs & other
stakeholders; (b) UNODC team (competence, commitment
& hard work).
 Main weaknesses: absence of (a) wider stakeholder
target group; (b) clear partnership agreement between
UNODC & TI (MoU).
 Context: Respondents raised concerns about the perception
of civil society engagement in CND & related meetings (in
Vienna/HQ): “closed; “almost discouraging”.
 But: positive interaction at 2nd IRG meeting (May 2013).
What results were achieved?
Key Findings
 Relevance:
 Strengthened CSOs’ voice in the fight against
corruption
 Facilitated CSOs’ meaningful engagement in the
review process (when invited)
 CSOs’ ability to use UNCAC knowledge to guide
relevant stakeholders & secure other CSOs’
commitment in the fight against corruption
But: need training that is relevant to national context
& includes other skills
What results were achieved?
Key Findings
 Effectiveness: Direct Compelling Effect
credited by CSOs to the training: Many CSOs
 Have been invited to take part in the review
mechanism (eg. Cambodia, Tunisia, Ghana, Kenya..)
 Have strengthened their voice/increased their
convening power (demonstrated that the fight against
corruption is legal)  leadership & influence anticorruption activities.
 Experienced positive interaction with State Parties
(break barriers & build confidence).
 Creation of entry point  dialogue, multiplier effect.
What results were achieved?
Key Findings
 Impact & Strategic Linkages: CSOs’ UNCAC
knowledge  IEC/Advocacy  draw citizens’
attention to UNCAC provisions anti-corruption fight
is legal & there is witness protection:
 Relevance: breaking the silence & complacency.
 Appropriateness: CSOs’ advocacy widens the anticorruption stakeholder base.
 Effectiveness: witness protection addresses fears &
breaks the silence around corruption.
 Effect/impact: feeling of protection (almost) compels
one to take action ripple effect: others join the fight
against corruption.
What results were achieved?
Key Findings
 Potential medium/long-term impact:
(interconnectedness: governance, HR, peace &
security)
 People’s empowerment to exercise their rights
 Potential reduction in cases of human rights violation
(whistleblowing, witness protection) (some success
stories for quotation)
 Private Sector Component: 10 grants, 5 reviewed,
results: mostly assessment of SMEs to find entry
points to sensitize them about UNCAC & their
potential contribution. One project: multi-pronged but
results yet to demonstrate effectiveness.
What results were achieved?
Key Findings
 Partnership & project management:
 UNODC/TI & UNCAC Coalition: Project
benefits from this excellent partnership  need
clear framework (MoU) delineating roles &
responsibilities (inc. for resource mobilisation).
 Project Management: UNODC (CST & CEB)
form an efficient & committed team that need
further support (financial & human resources)
Way Forward:
Conclusions & Recommendations
 Conclusion: all 3 objectives (strengthening the voice of
CSOs, creating a dialogue platform, capacity development
to work with the private sector) have been achieved 
knowledge transfer, advocacy & awareness creation
CSO’s increased convening power & widened their
stakeholder base.
 Recommendations: Extend project for 3-5 years
strategic phase
 Multi-stakeholder target group
 Training of trainers (ToT) – regional focus & with local
partners
 Include other capacity development skills.
 Create a knowledge management base.
Way Forward
 This is an excellent project that is needed within
and beyond Africa and should therefore be
extended & should incorporate other regions.
THANK YOU

similar documents