DfID and AusAID reviews of UNESCO and responses.

UNESCO has published some facts and figures on the Organization's reforms. The graph above is from that publication. It shows the budget for UNESCO by biennium (the 36th biennium is 2012 and 2013). The graph shows the considerable reduction in the current biennium, in part due to the United States withholding its assessed contributions to UNESCO.

The Department for International Development (DfID) of the United Kingdom did a multilateral aid review in 2011. It is currently updating that review. Here is a page with the 2011 judgments for UNESCO. UNESCO has provided an update on its operations for the 2013 exercise.

Similarly, the Australian AID organization (AusAID) developed scorecards for multilateral organizations in 2012. Here is the scorecard for UNESCO. Here are UNESCO's comments on the scorecard.

UNESCO Strategic Program Objective Evaluations Completed 2008-2010

Member states of UNESCO are currently formulating suggestions as to the priorities for the next biennium. UNESCO has suggested that thes evaluations of accomplishments under UNESCO's strategic program objectives may provide valuable information for that purpose. Those evaluations are:

• Strengthening UNESCO’s global lead and coordination role for EFA and providing support to national leadership in favour of EFA
• Developing policies, capacities and tools for quality education for all and lifelong learning as well as promoting education for sustainable development
• Leveraging scientific knowledge for the benefit of the environment and the management of natural resources
• Fostering Policies and Capacity-Building in Science, Technology and Innovation
• Promoting principles, practices and ethical norms relevant to scientific and technological development
• Sustainably protecting and enhancing cultural heritage
• Support through UNESCO’s domains to countries in post-conflict situations and postdisaster situations

Evaluation of Learning and Development at UNESCO

UNESCO’s Internal Oversight Service (IOS) contracted Cathexis Consulting to carry out an evaluation to assess the relevance of UNESCO’s learning and development policy in meeting the current and future needs of the Organization. The study was also to evaluate the effectiveness and key results of the policy's associated activities. The evaluation was intended to identify strengths as well as to determine where changes are needed and to recommend actions to be taken by the key stakeholders. The evaluation was expected to make recommendations with respect to the appropriateness of its policy as well as to the implementation process.

Learning and development has advanced tremendously in UNESCO since 2004 when the learning and development policy was developed. In the space of five years, UNESCO has thus moved from very minimal attention on learning and development to implementing a suite of training programmes made possible through a dedicated learning and development funding envelope each biennium.

The evaluation found that the learning and development policy is generally consistent with recognized good practice; however, its actual implementation needs further attention. The authors of the report noted that the budget for implementation of the learning and development policy was reduced from the 2006-7 biennium to the 2008-9 biennium, and further reduced for the current 2010-11 biennium. It recommended that the College of Associate Directors General review the policy and its implementation.

Authors: Martha McGuire (Team Leader), David MacCoy and Burt Perrin, January 2010. (PDF, 64 pages)

Comment: I was surprised that UNESCO had not had a formal policy for staff development and learning until 2004, and most surprised that an organization built around its expertise in education had not done better in implementing the policy. The reduction in resources devoted to learning and organizational development seems inappropriate. JAD

"Risk-Based Evaluation of UNESCO’s Capacity to Deliver"

The Evaluation Section of UNESCO's Internal Oversight Service has just published an analysis of the risks perceived by the Organizations leaders as they face the organization's future. The top ten risks that were identified are:

1) The gap between expected and available resources;
2) Uncertainty about future regular budget and reliance on extrabudgetary funding;
3) Complex structure which does not promote intersectoral collaboration;
4) Lack of responsiveness to our clients;
5) Inadequate information and network systems;
6) Insufficient accountability;
7) Incomplete performance-based monitoring;
8) Untimely succession plan;
9) Imbalance between process control and program delivery;
10) Predominance of central services over programs.

Read the full report!

Editorial Comment: These risks seem rather bureaucratic to me.

"SINCE WARS BEGIN IN THE MINDS OF MEN, it is in the minds of men that the defences of peace must be constructed."
From the preamble of UNESCO's Constitution

UNESCO was created after World War II. The United Nations, and especially the UN Security Council were created to allow the community of nations to take political action to prevent or limit wars. UNESCO was created simultaneously, with the primary mission of building the defenses of peace in the minds of men. The job of building those defenses is far from complete, and indeed the worsening global financial crisis may bring with it greater likelihood of intra and international wars. Perhaps the greatest risk faced by UNESCO is that it will not be able to make sufficient progress in the current crisis in building the defenses of peace in the minds of men.

I understand the charter of UNESCO, with the inclusion of education, science, culture and communications in its programmatic responsibilities, to include services to help develop the intellectual capacities of the world's societies. While the genesis of UNESCO was in the concerns of the allies to rebuild the educational and scientific institutions destroyed by World War II, decolonization has led to a major emphasis on helping developing nations to build towards "information societies" and indeed toward "knowledge societies".

UNESCO's flagship program in this respect is the Organization's support for Education for All, and that global initiative is surely going to fail to meet its goals set for 2015. Even those ambitious goals fall far short of what is needed to achieve a global community of knowledge societies. Thus there is a great risk that UNESCO will not adequately play the role envisioned by its founders and its member nations in helping to develop the intellectual capacities of the societies of its member nations.

John Daly
(The opinions expressed are those of the author, and do not necessarily represent those of Americans for UNESCO.)

Review of UNESCO’s Capacity-Building Function

A review was completed last February or UNESCO’s experience in capacity building and of the international research on capacity building to answer the following questions:

1. What have UNESCO and others learned about the most effective approaches to capacity building?
2. What should UNESCO’s role in capacity building be (given UN reforms that emphasize country-led, comprehensive development strategies and collaboration among donor agencies)?
3. What needs to change within UNESCO in order to do a better job of capacity building?

The purpose of this review was to inform UNESCO's senior management about good practices in capacity-building and to enable UNESCO's Secretariat to improve their capacity-building interventions.

A key finding of the review was:

Most UNESCO staff members interviewed recognize that capacity building needs to get beyond conventional inputs, such as training and technical assistance, in order to bring about sustainable change within institutions. However, much of the Organization’s programming begins and ends there.

Read the full Review (PDF, 47 pages.)

UNESCO's Internal Oversight Service

UNESCO's Internal Oversight Service (IOS), established in 2001, provides consolidated oversight covering internal audit, evaluation, investigation and other management support to strengthen the functioning of the Organization. The IOS website provides links to recent evaluations, as well as guidance for evaluations, and links to evaluation resources.

Some examples are:

• Evaluation of UNESCO’s contribution to the World Water Assessment Programme (WWAP)
• Evaluation of the UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education
• Evaluation of the UNESCO Institute for Statistics
  
• Evaluation of the Information for All Programme