In 2008, the General Assembly (GA) requested an evaluation of the CERF’s activities, with results to be presented at the GA’s 65th session. The evaluation, conducted by Channel Research, encompassed the five-year period of 2006 – 2010 and marked the third evaluation since 2005 to specifically focus on the CERF. It highlighted the CERF’s strengths and weaknesses and provided recommendations at the policy and operational levels to improve its effectiveness. More broadly, the evaluation was intended to inform debates at the United Nations GA on the delivery of humanitarian assistance.
This evaluation specifically examined five key areas:
Added Value: The performance and “added value” of the CERF grant and revolving fund in the context of the humanitarian architecture and humanitarian reform process.
Management: The strategic, managerial and operational aspects of the CERF.
Achievements: The CERF’s success in meeting its objectives to (i) promote early action and response to reduce loss of life, (ii) enhance response to time-critical requirement, and (iii) strengthen core elements of the humanitarian response in underfunded crises.
Accountability: The level and nature of accountability between CERF-recipient actors.
Influencing factors: Internal and external factors which affect the CERF’s ability to deliver on its objectives.
Management Response Plan (MRP)
In line with OCHA’s Guidelines on Management Response and Follow-Up to Evaluations, the CERF Secretariat developed OCHA’s Management Response Plan (MRP) to the five-year evaluation in consultation with a variety of stakeholders both inside and outside of the UN Secretariat, and the MRP was then approved by the Under-Secretary-General and Emergency Relief Coordinator, Ms. Valerie Amos. Implementation of the follow-up actions contained in the MRP will be tracked by the CERF Secretariat and the MRP periodically updated before the meetings of the CERF Advisory Group.
The recent MRP was reviewed and updated in September 2013.
Country Reports for the Five-year Evaluation of CERF
The Evaluation was carried out by a team of twelve independent consultants over an eight-month period. Data was collected through 16 case studies, based on seven field missions (Afghanistan, Kenya, Niger, the occupied Palestinian territory, Pakistan, the Philippines and Somalia (the Somalia study was conducted from Kenya)) where the CERF had funded humanitarian programmes and a desk-based review of CERF operations in nine other countries (Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, El Salvador, Guatemala, Lesotho, Mongolia and Nepal). Country studies were supplemented by visits to UN headquarters in Geneva, Rome and New York and to six donor agency headquarters. The data was analyzed.