Palestine DCA/NCA Joint Country Programme Evaluation 2016-2020

Summary of the JCP evaluation 2016-2020

This report presents an evaluation of the performance of the Joint Country Programme (JCP) with a focus on the extent of its contribution to the DCA global goals of Save Lives, Build Resilient Communities, and Fight Extreme Inequality and NCA’s Global Programmes sub-goals which include: Peacebuilding, Gender Based Violence, and Climate resilient-WASH. It provides an overview of the operational dynamics of the JCP in Palestine, a context overview of the conditions by which the JCP operates under, the findings of this evaluation and suggested recommendations. As the JCP in Palestine comes to the end of its five-year cycle, this evaluation serves to aid the development of a new programme strategy for Palestine (2021-2025) by capturing learning for future programming to ensure maximum outcomes for the JCP’s target groups.

The Evaluation Team (ET) adopted a mixed-methods approach employing primary and secondary, qualitative and quantitative data. To inform the evaluation, the ET conducted a desk review, partner typology, key informant interviews, focus group discussions, and a mini-survey. The ET maintained a participatory approach which emphasizes a multi-dimensional assessment of the JCP within its context to identify the relational dynamics between the intervention, context, and development.

This assists in unpacking the discrepancies between expected outcomes versus achieved outcomes. The evaluation did not go without challenges such as the eruption of the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting lockdown. In addition, due to the variances in documentation, technical difficulties which arose during the data collection process, and scope/type of programme, access to documents required was a challenging process. This was mitigated through consistent communications with, and support from, the CO focal points and through communication with selected partners. The ToC requires revision, especially in regards to assumptions. The CO should consult with civil society, political analysts, and relevant representatives to gauge most feasible, relevant and applicable pathways for ToC design. The JCP can consider ToC contingencies to outline for its upcoming programming cycle.

This helps avoid faltering into an intervention which operationalizes on the basis of outdated assumptions. This may have implications of future impact and outcome successes of the programme.The JCP should hold regular meetings for internal reflection, assessment, and evaluation of its advocacy approach and reflect on ways to connect national and international efforts for awareness raising in regards to rights in the OPT and the links between the role of international (EU) communities and OPT. Advocacy efforts should be focused in designing efforts which promote meaningful changes in policy and relations for achieving justice and peace, as defined by Palestinian communities.

For the JCP this necessarily includes more defined outcome indicators and specific goals for each advocacy activity. Mapping advocacy efforts in the EU, those in Israel, and in OPT and how each contributes to the other, will allow the JCP to better locate opportunities, strengths, and available resources for maximizing impact. The JCP can develop its M&E by developing and extending the tools, resources, knowledge required for partners to design and implement selfmonitoring in order to ensure effective and informative institutional memory.

This also serves in measuring the impact of the JCP beyond its life-cyle and any intended or unintended consequences. The JCP can set an agreed upon, fixed, and feasible number of interventions to be achieved for each outcome. This would also require flexibility, support, and assistance from HQs for CO staff. HQs need to unify monitoring and reporting requirements as well as revise SOs to revise organizational priorities and how they relate to dynamics in OPT. This may allow for more effective and relevant activity designs by partners, and ease any partner anxieties towards securing funds while prioritizing community needs and expanding innovative capacities.

Adopting formal policies and partnership selection processes focused around activity goals and ToC may help avoid risks of partnership loyalties at the expense of Palestinian community needs. Partner strategic selection may be examined in how the different partnerships, when combined, are complementary to one another. CO can develop a data-base of different CBOs in the region in accordance to niche expertize and target communities. The JCP requires focusing its thematic components.

The diversity of the JCP is its strength, however the ambiguity of thematic focus weakens the JCP’s ability to design activities and seek partnerships which are complementary and mutually reinforcing. JCO should define more concise and focused indicators for each theme, which can be done in consultation with experts.

The indicators need to reflect feasibility and have clear measurement which distinguished between input, output, outcome and impact. Moreover, JCP can incorporate other measurement methods through qualitative data by increasing presence amongst beneficiary groups and and follow-up monitoring visits to inform narrative reports. Narrative reports should include questions which allow for assessing impact on the short-term and long-term.

This helps JCP in reflecting more regularly on lessons learned.