This snapshot, taken on
23/01/2013
, shows web content acquired for preservation by The National Archives. External links, forms and search may not work in archived websites and contact details are likely to be out of date.
 
 
The UK Government Web Archive does not use cookies but some may be left in your browser from archived websites.

Multilateral Aid Review summary - United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)

UNFPA leads on sexual and reproductive health rights (SRHR) and supports countries to use population data for policies and programmes to reduce poverty. It has a central role on MDG 5 (maternal health) & supporting role on MDG 6 (HIV/AIDS) and MDG 3 (gender equality).

 

comment

Contribution to UK development objectives




Satisfactory
+ Its role is critical in advancing MDG 5 and related MDGs through global level advocacy and delivery.
+ Its work on SRHR is unique, especially around family planning and population issues.
+ UNFPA reports comprehensively against its global objectives, but 
these are mainly set at the activity and outcome level.
_ Delivery in-country is mixed. Systems reform is not bringing consistency.
_ Policy on conflict and fragility is limited to security awareness and there is no evidence of a nuanced organisational approach.
+ It has a wide range of policies to tackle gender. Management is held to account (though evidence of impact is at times unclear).
_ No evidence of policies for consideration of environmental issues.

Organisational strengths



Weak
+ Has a good track record on procurement. Its procurement strategy considers value for money related principles.
_ Administration costs are high and UNFPA does not systematically report on prices achieved or track procurement savings. 
+ Strong partnerships with civil society, partner countries and other agencies. It reinforces country-led approaches and incorporates beneficiary voice in policies and programmes.
_ Management has strived to improve strategic and performance management, but leadership in country remains mixed.
_ Evaluation culture and global level results chains are weak.
+ Oversight and financial resource management have strengthened, with flexibility to respond to country needs.
_ Audit concerns have been made a priority but progress on this is slow, especially on national execution. No evidence that poor performing projects are curtailed and savings recycled.
_ Accountability to partner governments is strong, but transparency is weak; there is no presumption of disclosure and insufficient programme information is published.

Capacity for positive change

Likely
+ There is a strong track record on reform but overlapping change management initiatives should be simplified.
Last updated: 03 Oct 2011