3 minute read
Table 2. Country programme outcomes and expenditure 2017-2020 (million US$
between 2017 and 2019 to 48 percent in 2020. This is attributed to ongoing changes in government and the COVID-19 situation, the latter particularly affecting sub-national programmes.
Government financing, though declining in recent years (from 89 percent to 46 percent between 2013 and 2020) is the most important source of funding for the country programme, averaging about 66 percent of total expenditure in this period. GEF vertical funds are also important sources of funding for the country programme (amounting to 16 percent of expenditure for the same period). Over the 2017-2020 period, the proportion of government financing decreased to 53 percent of total expenditure, while vertical funding (now including Green Climate Fund) increased to about 25 percent of total expenditure.
Programme implementation
Guided by Brazil’s international technical cooperation framework, the country programme was implemented under a tripartite arrangement, involving ABC, UNDP and national implementing partners. Brazil’s technical cooperation legal framework, Decree 5,151/2004, is the main legal instrument governing technical cooperation received from bilateral and multilateral agencies. Yet, myriad norms and rules about the subject have been issued by ABC, the National Treasury and the Supreme Audit Institution over the last 10 years that must be observed by national counterparts. This fragmented set of legal documents has imposed several restrictions on technical cooperation delivered in Brazil, including on IT system development, logistics, events and equipment.
TABLE 2. Country programme outcomes and expenditure 2017-2020 (million US$)
Programme component/outcome
Inclusive socio-economic development
Strengthened social development throughout the country, with poverty reduction through access to quality public goods and services Inclusive and environmentally sustainable economic growth
Governance and justice
A peaceful, fair and inclusive society promoted through social participation, transparency and democratic governance, respecting the secularity of the State and ensuring human rights for all 47.8 22.6 47%
Sustainable management of natural resources
Strengthened institutional capacity to promote public policies for the sustainable management of natural resources and ecosystem services, combating climate change and its adverse effects, and ensuring the consistency and implementation of these policies 93.0 64.6 69%
Total
Source: UNDP Corporate Planning System (Atlas) *As of December 2020 Budget* Expenditure* Delivery rate*
116.6 78.1 67%
40.4 19.3 48%
$297.8 $184.6 62%
There is a mix of national and direct implementation modalities (DIM and NIM), with a higher share of DIM projects and expenditures (54 percent and 46 percent, respectively).63 The higher proportion of DIM projects is unexpected and is attributed to ongoing changes in the programming environment and the complex nature of many of the project designs, with numerous stakeholders involved.
Follow up on the previous Assessment of Development Results recommendations: The previous independent evaluation of UNDP Brazil (2011) resulted in 11 recommendations, with strategic and operational implications for the programme and country office. Given the time that lapsed and turnover in the country office, it was not feasible for this evaluation to track the specific actions taken to respond to these recommendations. However, according to the management response, the country office had agreed partially or fully with all but one, which called for re-profiling of the UNDP technical team. In its management response, the country office recognized the need to strengthen staff knowledge in new thematic areas to cover expanding demands from national stakeholders, but indicated challenges it had faced in previous attempts to re-profile staff capacities. Nonetheless, the evaluation was informed that the country office continues to undergo frequent restructuring, which affects staff continuity and morale. The last change management exercise was conducted in 2017.
63 Under DIM, UNDP is the implementing/executing partner and assumes accountability for the management of the project and delivery of outputs. In NIM, a national entity (excluding state-owned enterprises) is the implementing partner and assumes this accountability (UNDP Programme and Operations Policy Manual).
