CHAPTER 1. BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION

Following the terms of reference, the IEO recruited two international and one national consultant to support the data collection and assessment process. Purposive sampling was used, based on a number of criteria, including: programme coverage (projects covering the various thematic and cross‑cutting areas such as gender, leaving no one behind and human rights); financial expenditure (a representative mix of large and smaller projects); geographic coverage (project location); maturity (completed and active projects); national (NIM) and direct (DIM) implementation modalities; GEN marker status; and donor (type of assistance). The sampling allowed for a good representation of the span of CPD work, and exploration of the project design process, institutional structures and processes, partnerships, policy development and sustainability.

Based on this analysis of the country office portfolio, the team selected 29 projects (27 percent of the portfolio) for in‑depth review and analysis, representing a cross‑section of UNDP work in the country across the three outcomes (Annex 5).

The evaluation team undertook an extensive review of documents. This included, among others, background documents on the regional and national context, documents from international partners (such as the African Union, international financial institutions [IFIs]], donor agencies, etc.) and other United Nations agencies; project and programme documents such as work plans and progress reports; monitoring and self‑assessment reports such as the yearly UNDP Results‑Oriented Annual Reports (ROARs); strategy notes; and project and programme evaluations conducted by the country office, including quality assurance and audit reports. The evaluation made extensive use of IEO thematic evaluations such as the evaluation of UNDP support in middle‑income countries, the evaluation of UNDP support to youth economic empowerment, the evaluation of UNDP support to energy‑efficiency, the evaluation of the UNDP Strategic Plan 2018–2021 and the joint evaluation with Global Environment Facility (GEF) of the Small Grants Programme (SGP).

The desk review and portfolio analysis were used to undertake a stakeholder analysis to identify all relevant UNDP partners, and those that may not have worked with UNDP but play a key role in the outcomes to which it contributes. The analysis was used to identify key informants to interview during the main data collection phase, and to examine any potential partnerships that could improve the UNDP contribution to the country. The evaluation sought balanced representation of different types of actors involved in the programme: counterparts and implementing public institutions; local entities; final beneficiaries; the private sector; civil society; academia; and other international organizations present in Egypt.

The effectiveness of the UNDP country programme was analysed through an assessment of progress made towards the achievement of expected outputs and the extent to which these outputs contributed to the intended CPD outcomes. To better understand UNDP performance and the sustainability of results, the ICPE examined the specific factors that have influenced the programme positively and negatively. UNDP capacity to adapt to the changing context and respond to national development needs and priorities was also considered.

The evaluation relied on information collected from different sources and then triangulated to the extent possible:

• A review of UNDP strategic and programme documents, project documents and monitoring reports, decentralized evaluations,4 research papers and other available country‑related publica‑ tions. The primary documents consulted by the evaluation team are listed in Annex 4, online. • An analysis of the programme portfolio and theories of change by programme area, and a mapping of implemented projects against the goals set in the CPD.

4 16 decentralized evaluations were conducted in the period under consideration.