Kosovo

The evaluation covered all European Union (EU) external action support to IPA Roma inclusion projects in the Western Balkans and Türkiye between 2016 and 2023. The main objectives of this assignment were to: i) provide an independent and evidence-based assessment of the EU's past and current external action support in the area of Roma inclusion; and ii) provide lessons learnt and recommendations at EU level to inform ongoing and future decision-making in improving current and future EU strategies, programmes and actions on Roma inclusion.

The evaluation was centred around three main thematic areas:

• Civil rights (registration, data collection, monitoring, reporting, fight against discrimination and antigypsyism);
• Economic and social rights (health, employment, education and housing, including access to public services);
• Roma inclusion in governments' green and digital agendas.

Additionally, the evaluation addressed broader cross-cutting issues such as human rights, the need to ensure appropriate treatment for vulnerable groups including children, fight against environmental poverty and climate change, social inclusion and gender equality.

The analysis covered both spending and non-spending actions and examined all funding mechanisms and modalities of implementation used under IPA II and III.

The objective of this facility is to improve the overall quality of the NDICI Rapid Response and Peace, Stability and Conflict Prevention thematic areas by providing high quality research services.

We will provide the FPI with flexible and ad hoc research services and prepare literature reviews and rapid assistance reports in the thematic areas specified below.

The main objectives of this evaluation were to provide the relevant services of the European Union and the interested stakeholders with:

• an overall independent assessment of the performance of the TACSO programme (in its three phases), paying particular attention to its different levels of results measured against its expected objectives; and the reasons underpinning such results
• key lessons learned, conclusions and related recommendations in order to improve current and future interventions.

In particular, this evaluation served:

• To inform the implementation of the programme fourth phase, which will be implemented through an extension of the current contract (TACSO 3);
• To inform the decision-making on the appropriateness of a potential fifth phase of the programme, to be launched with the next programming exercise (CSF 2024-2026);
• To inform the potential programme exit strategy to ensure the sustainability of its results.

The main users of this evaluation are the relevant EU services (DG NEAR HQ and EU Delegations of the targeted region) and the implementing partners.

The main objectives of this evaluation are to provide the relevant services of the European Union, the interested stakeholders with:

• An overall independent assessment of the performance of selected CT-P/CVE measures funded by FPI.2 during the years 2017-2022, paying particular attention to its different levels of results measured against its expected objectives; and the reasons underpinning such results
• As a particular approach to regional actions, a specific case study shall be carried out to assess the regional framework for support to CT-P/CVE measures in the Asian context, managed by the Regional Team in Bangkok. It is expected that the present evaluation assesses the relevance, added value and success of developing a model for CT and P/CVE actions, respectively, which have been replicated in different countries/contexts in Asia/Pacific (in Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Maldives for CT; and in Southeast Asia, Sri Lanka and Maldives for P/CVE). If deemed relevant, links can also be made to regional approaches in other RTs;
• Key lessons learned, conclusions and related recommendations in order to improve current and future interventions.

In particular, this evaluation will serve the contracting authority and other interested services to better understand the performance of the Intervention, its enabling factors and those hampering a proper delivery of results to inform the planning and implementation of current and future support to tackle CTP/CVE.

The main use of the results of the evaluation is expected to be

• To draw general lessons that can be used for the future approach to interventions in the sector
• To draw specific lessons that can be replicated in other similar interventions
• To draw specific lessons from the regional approaches, in particular the one applied by the Regional Team in Bangkok in terms of stocktaking, dynamics and replicability.

The main users of this evaluation will be the contracting authority, FPI.2, including its Regional Teams in Bangkok, Nairobi, Dakar, Eastern Europe and Central Asia (managed from Brussels). The Regional Team in Brasilia is less involved since they currently do not manage any CT-P/CVE projects.

The purpose of this study is i) to provide an independent and evidence-based assessment of the EU's past and current external action support in the policy area of environment and climate change in Enlargement and Neighbourhood regions; and ii) based on this assessment, to provide lessons learnt and recommendations for decision-makers at EU level.

The evaluation encompasses both spending and non-spending activities between 2014 and 2020. It examines all funding mechanisms and modalities of implementation used under the Instrument for Pre-Accession (IPA) II and the European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI) in a variety of sectors (e.g. energy, water and waste management).

The evaluation covers all thematic areas related to environment and climate change, paying special attention to i) issues of mainstreaming in EU external aid programmes and projects for the ten sectors in the environmental chapter of the acquis; and ii) the EU support provided through international organisations, in particular support aimed at strengthening environment and climate change governance at national and regional levels. Process and context factors – conducive to or hampering the performance of EU support, including in terms of the convergence with EU legislation in the regions under scope – are also systematically assessed.

The evaluation aims to contribute to ongoing EU strategic discussions on the use of innovative financing, in particular blending, which is playing an increasingly important role in EU support to environment and climate change. The evaluation results are also useful in enriching ongoing reflections on the future role of European Development Finance Institutions in EU external action. Finally, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, the evaluation contributes to identifying good practices that can strengthen Team Europe’s ongoing efforts to help ‘build back better’ and design ‘risk-informed and climate-smart’ recovery actions.

The purpose of this evaluation was to build an evidence base regarding SDC’s engagement in climate change adaptation and mitigation, including partnerships established by SDC to address climate change adaptation and mitigation at global, regional and national level.

The evaluation was designed to:

• Contribute to strategic decision-making (i.e. for the Dispatch 2021-2024).
• Derive lessons learnt in order to improve institutional performance.
• Serve as one measure of accountability towards the Parliament and the public.

The evaluation : i) assessed the successes, difficulties / challenges (including failures) of programmes and projects in Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation implemented by SDC; ii) identified ‘good practices’ and determined how they could be systematically applied within SDC; iii) conducted a comparison / benchmarking of SDC’s performance compared to international practices; and iv) assessed the effectiveness and rate of achievement of projects and programmes.

The evaluation covered activities implemented during a period of six years (2015-2020) from all domains of SDC (i.e. South Cooperation; Global Cooperation; Humanitarian Aid; and Cooperation with Eastern Europe). It concentrated on projects in the area of climate change adaptation (CCA) and climate change mitigation (CCM) that SDC steers or co-steers. This includes direct implemented projects, mandates and contributions to trust or basket funds, etc. It excludes core contributions to multilateral organizations, large Funds (GCF, IDA, etc.) and NGOs.

The RPP Program Evaluation is being conducted to assess the implementation, management governance, and results of the program observed until the date of the evaluation to draw lessons for future programming. The evaluation was expected to benefit design and implementation of other similar ongoing and future Advisory Services and Analytics (ASA) activities. This Evaluation has assessed:

• 1.
  Program strategy design and approach: with a forward-looking approach, independent evaluator(s) will assess RPP strategy, and management and governance arrangements.
• 2.
  Country program performance: assessed based on the modified Organization for Economic Cooperationnand Development (OECD)/Development Assistance Committee (DAC) evaluation criteria, notably—Relevance, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Coherence and Sustainability. However where outcomes are already available, these were assessed.
• 3.
  Knowledge management performance: assessed based on the evaluation questions below, focusing on RPP’s relevance, effectiveness, efficiency on producing frontier knowledge on areas relevant for the countries and topics it supports in an efficient and impactful way.
• 4.
  A list of the donor-specific criteria for external evaluations to be used (based on OECD-DAC criteria) will be shared with the evaluators. The scope of the evaluation has to be defined accordingly in the inception report.

The purpose of the Election Expert Mission (EEM) was to collect and analyse factual information, assess and report on the electoral process against international commitments, standards and good practice for democratic elections in line with the criteria contained in the Commission Communication on Electoral Assistance and Observation. The experts also formulated recommendations to improve future electoral processes and assess, when relevant, the state of implementation of recommendations made by previous electoral missions

The main objective of this evaluation was to provide an independent assessment and evidence on the contribution of EU external action support in the policy area of gender equality and women empowerment (GEWE). In line with the EU policy on evaluation, this evaluation sought to be a stock- taking lesson-learning and forward-looking exercise, as well as an accurate assessment of achieved results in line with the objectives of the EU Gender Action Plan (GAP) II and other relevant overall policy frameworks for gender equality such as the new approach on Women, Peace and Security Agenda, Agenda 2030, the New European Consensus for Development.

Its specific objectives were the following:

• To assess in both qualitative and quantitative terms the relevance, conditions of implementation and performance of EU external action to promote GEWE and its mainstreaming, particularly its efficiency, effectiveness, sustainability, and the EU added value.
• To assess whether the EU's policy and operational response on GEWE in partner regions (EU Plans of Action on Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment for 2010-2015 and 2016-2020) have triggered new approaches and rendered EU external action support more effective, targeted, gender-responsive and efficient.
• To assess: a) the coordination and complementarity of the European Commission services, the European External Action Service (EEAS) and EU Members States’ external action; b) the coordination and complementarity between EU external action support and other non-EU donors’ and actors’; c) the coherence of EU GEWE policy in external action with other relevant EU external policies; and d) the coherence of EU external action support with international commitments to GEWE.

The evaluation should lead to the identification of conclusions, lessons learnt (both positive and negative), good practices regarding the achievement of the intended GEWE-related results and the Commission, the EEAS and EU Member States with a set of targeted and useful forward-looking recommendations for the improvement of the programming and implementation.

Through the course of the evaluation, the evaluation team conducted 18 case studies (focusing on countries, regions and thematic areas) which were subject to an in-depth analysis, including 9 field visits. Both a ‘country-level’ and ‘global’ survey – covering EU services (HQ and EU Delegations/Offices worldwide), EU Member States, other development partners and Civil Society Organisations – were part of the data collection and analysis process. Findings from all evaluation activities were synthesized into a final report.

Final report available here: https://ec.europa.eu/international-partnerships/evaluation-eus-external-action-support-area-gender-equality-and-womens-and-girls-empowerment_en

The overall objective of this assignment is to conduct a final evaluation of 2014/355-412 Gender-sensitive Transitional Justice.

The final evaluation will provide the European Commission, the implementing partners, and other relevant stakeholders with:

• an independent assessment of the overall intervention, paying particularly attention to the design of the tool, the set-up of the agreement, and results achieved against its objectives; and
• key lessons and recommendations in order to improve current and future actions financed under the IcSP in this sector of intervention.

The specific objectives of this final evaluation are:

• to assess the performance of the project, including type of intervention, design and execution of assignment as well as its results;
• to assess if and to what extent the project has contributed to strengthen the capacities of the implementing partners to engage in transitional justice at international, regional or local levels;
• to assess the relevance of the project in this context and sector of intervention, and in comparison to other transitional justice related initiatives;
• to make an assessment of the project’s visibility, information and communication;
• to identify and document good practices and key lessons learned on mainstreaming gender- sensitivity into transitional justice processes;
• to produce a set of recommendations that will assist the EU in designing and implementing future actions in the area of transitional justice, in applying gender-sensitive approaches to a specific thematic area, and in managing multi-country projects.
• to assess the extent to which the project has contributed to strengthen EU-UN relations in the field of transitional justice

The technical assistance/the contractor is expected to support Kosovo central and local government (Ministry of Public Administration, Ministry of Trade and Industry, Ministry of Local Governance Administration and municipalities) to build procedures, mechanisms and human capacities to steer and implement the reform agenda. The technical assistance will support the implementation of service delivery modernization agenda by assisting institutions in Kosovo to implement the Law on General Administrative Procedures.

The global objective was the systematic and timely evaluation of the twinning projects “Support to Kosovo Assembly” (CRIS 2011/277-389), “Strengthening the functioning of Kosovo Assembly”(CRIS 2014/341-055) and “Further support to the Kosovo Assembly” (CRIS 2016/372-105). The focus of evaluations was on the assessment of achievements, the quality and the results of actions in the context of an evolving cooperation policy with an increasing emphasis on result-oriented approaches. From this perspective, evaluations looked for evidence of why, whether or how these results were linked to the EU intervention and seeked to identify the factors driving or hindering progress.

The specific objectives of this evaluation were to provide the relevant services of the European Union, the interested stakeholders and the wider public with:

• an overall independent assessment of the past performance of the projects
• key lessons and recommendations in order to improve future actions. In particular, this evaluation served the EU Office in Kosovo relevant services in headquarters for planning future assistance to the Assembly, the Ministry of European Integration and the main users of this evaluation were the above institutions.

In particular this evaluation served:

• To understand the extent to which the programme has contributed towards the creation of the independent institution, with strengthen oversight role, and role in EU related issues;
• To understand the performance of the programme, its enabling factors and those hampering a proper delivery of results as to inform the planning of the future EU interventions and actions in the Kosovo Assembly.
• Provide recommendations for the possible future actions in the Kosovo Assembly.

The purpose of the evaluation was to provide an overall independent assessment of the regional organisations and fora in the Western Balkans and the instrumental role they play in the regional integration and accession perspective including recommendations on possible streamlining.

The specific objectives of the evaluation were the following:

• Mapping of existing regional organisations and initiatives;
• Assessment of administrative and financial costs for its member countries of each organisation/initiative;
• Assessment of benefits for the region/countries of each organisation/initiative;
• Proposal for possible streamlining.

The evaluation mapped 56 organisations in the six Western Balkan IPA countries that were still active in June 2016 (cut-off date) and analysed 31 of them in detail. The key sectors included: connectivity (transport, energy and environment), competitiveness (industry and private sector development, trade), skills and mobility (human capital development, higher education), good governance, fighting crime and security cooperation.

The Evaluation of the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA II) assessed whether IPA II is fit for purpose to deliver EU resources towards EU's external policy, both at start of the planning period (2014) and at the time of the evaluation (2017), and considered the place of IPA II – its complementarities and synergies – within the wider set of external financing instruments.

The objective of the IPA II evaluation was: 1) to provide the relevant external relations services of the European Union and the wider public with an independent assessment of the IPA II instrument, including complementarities/synergies between IPA II and the other EFIs; and 2) to inform the future programming and implementation of the current EFIs, as well as the next generation of the EFIs.

The evaluation was evidence-based using a non-experimental mixed methods approach combining quantitative and, more importantly, qualitative data and was guided by Evaluation Questions (EQ) covering EU evaluation criteria (relevance; effectiveness, impact and sustainability; efficiency; added value; coherence, consistency, complementarity and synergies; leverage).

The main analytical tools consisted of a rigorous assessment of documentation, analysis of statistics and quantitative data and a consultation of stakeholders (via interviews, group discussions, the online-survey focusing on EU Delegations and the Open Public Consultation).

The report is available at:

https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/sites/near/files/final_report_ipa_ii_evaluation.zip