Table 2. UNDP COVID-19 budget utilization, 2020 and 2021, as of November 2021

TABLE 2. UNDP COVID-19 budget utilization, 2020 and 2021, as of November 2021

(In millions of United States dollars)

Health systems support Inclusive integrated crisis management Social protection Digital disruption Governance

Socioeconomic impact assessments Green economy

Source: UNDP COVID-19 Monitoring Dashboard 2020 2021 Total %

361 370 731 44 125 291 416 25 61 115 176 11 39 73 112 7 38 64 102 6 26 53 79 5 25 15 40 2 675 981 1,656 100

Finding 3. UNDP support to the health sector was central to the initial pandemic response in many countries and was well aligned with government-led responses.

In the initial months of the pandemic, Governments of programme countries were responding to an unfolding crisis in health systems. UNDP supported this response through activities ranging from procurement support to the delivery of PPE, ventilators and other medical support. UNDP has shown itself to have robust procurement services in health, through the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, as well as the ability to respond quickly to crisis needs.77

The country studies undertaken for the evaluation capture the scale of the crisis in which UNDP was operating. In Peru, a country severely hit by the pandemic, UNDP initially supported purchasing of PPE for indigenous communities and then collaborated with WHO and the Municipality of Lima to produce PPE for front-line workers made by a local company from recycled plastics, among other support.78 In Bangladesh, also severely hit by the pandemic, UNDP provided COVID-19 awareness materials and PPE supplies and supported the establishment of medical helplines. The Partnership for a Tolerant, Inclusive Bangladesh adjusted social media tools originally developed to fight violent extremism, to curb COVID-19 disinformation. In Armenia, existing disaster risk reduction partnerships shifted focus to COVID-19 preparedness and response and partnerships with youth groups helped to counter the spread of COVID-19 misinformation.

Spending across the four tipping points outlined in Beyond Recovery – governance, social protection, the green economy and digital disruption – accounts for a small proportion of overall fund utilization. In 2020 and 2021, health system support accounted for 44 percent of fund utilization, followed by inclusive and integrated crisis management (25 percent), social protection (11 percent), digital disruption and innovation (7 percent), governance (6 percent) and the green economy (2 percent).79 A shift to a more developmental approach to recovery has yet to be seen. The green economy, governance and

77 UNDP IEO, 2020, Reflection, Lesson from Evaluations: UNDP Support to the Health Sector. 78 https://www.pe.undp.org/content/peru/es/home/presscenter/articles/2021/nuevos-cascos-de-vida-para-la-primera-linea.html 79 UNDP COVID-19 Monitoring Dashboard, 17 November 2021.

social protection are not yet emerging as significant themes for the recovery in UNDP programmes but can be seen in the socioeconomic impact assessments and have been taken up in some government COVID-19 recovery plans.

Finding 4. UNDP took the technical lead in the development of the socioeconomic impact assessments, providing a strong strategic focus and coherence for UNDP country offices and support and guidance for government responses to COVID-19.

The socioeconomic impact assessments were developed jointly by UNCTs and Governments to provide “a vast set of analytical tools to take stock of the COVID-19 crisis, make rapid assessments, offer forecasts and simulations, prepare needs assessments and set the baselines for rigorous impact assessments.”80 The process of developing the assessments was not seen as a one-size-fits-all exercise and allowed Governments to focus on specific areas of urgency and interest as the pandemic evolved and to develop new assessments as new needs emerged. By June 2020, 63 assessments had been developed, an extraordinary achievement given the backdrop (lockdown and the health crisis) in a short space of time.81 At the time of writing this evaluation, 144 socioeconomic impact assessments have been completed. Some of them undertook a broad socioeconomic assessment of the impact of COVID-19 on countries, and others took a more thematic approach, reflecting the situation in the country and demands from Governments at different junctures of the pandemic.82

The development of the socioeconomic impact assessment was a timely intervention on the part of UNDP and the United Nations, providing a medium- to long-term assessment of the pandemic’s impact beyond the health sector. While the quality and timeliness of the assessments varied, there are clear examples of their content being taken up in whole or part by Governments to inform and even shape country-level response plans. In Kenya, the assessment formed the basis for county-level COVID-19 reconstruction plans and was a first step in identifying the impact of the pandemic and aligning the responses and resources of United Nations agencies to the United Nations socioeconomic response plans, under the leadership of the resident coordinator in country.

In Armenia, the development of the socioeconomic impact assessment illustrated the positive role played by UNDP as part of a broader coalition of support that provided social and economic analysis and advice to the Government. In Rwanda, the assessment was undertaken in collaboration with IFIs and the World Bank and was said to have informed responses beyond the United Nations agencies and Government, and recognized the position of UNDP in providing socioeconomic support, with the Government asking UNDP and the World Bank to co-chair the COVID-19 recovery development partners group. In Benin, the process led the Government to ask UNDP for assistance in the development of an integrated national response plan for COVID-19.

UNDP has used the impact assessment in some cases to position itself as a provider of socioeconomic analysis, providing an opportunity to continue this detailed level of socioeconomic analysis going forward beyond the crisis response. This is further illustrated in Afghanistan, where UNDP has recently developed a new socioeconomic outlook which details the regression of progress resulting from the precarious and unstable economic situation.83

80 UNDP, July 2020, Understanding Socio-economic Impact Assessments of COVID-19: An explanatory note for UNDP Country

Office Staff. 81 UNDP, June 2020, Brief 2: Putting the United Nations Framework for socio-economic response to COVID-19 into action: Insights. 82 https://www.undp.org/coronavirus/socio-economic-impact-covid-19 83 UNDP, 2021, Afghanistan Socio-Economic Outlook 2021-2022: Averting a Basic Needs Crisis.