Back to Annual Meeting
Back to Annual Meeting
APHA Scientific Session and Event Listing
A. Edward Elmendorf, MA, MPH, International Health/Evaluation Office, Johns Hopkins University/UN Development Program, 1901 Wyoming Avenue, NW, Apt. 61, Washington, DC 20009, 202-462-4989, email@example.com, Ikwo Ekpo, MA, MPH, Evaluation Office, UN Development Program, 801 First Avenue, New York, NY 10017, Anthony William Kinghorn, BSc, MBBCh, Director, Health and Development Africa Pty Ltd, South Africa, 25 Rosebank 2196, Postnet Suite #129, Parkview 2122, Rosebank, South Africa, and Sulley Gariba, PhD, Executive Director, Institute for Development Alternatives, Accra, Ghana, 1901 Wyoming Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20009.
This paper presents the results of an evaluation of the role and contributions of the UN Development Program to the HIV and AIDS response in ten countries of Southern Africa and Ethiopia. Commissioned by the Evaluation Office of UNDP in late 2004, the evaluation covered the period 1994-2004. The evaluation team consisted of four international consultants. They were complemented by national consultants in each of the case study countries, who undertook country case assessments. The evaluation was strategic in character, not focused on the evaluation of individual projects and interventions. It aimed to concentrate on outcomes, but found documenting outcomes difficult, particularly since many of the UNDP interventions were recent. Skills in evaluation, particularly in outcomes evaluation, were found lacking in UNDP Country Offices. The evaluation discussed UNDP's comparative advantages among development partners engaged in the HIV and AIDS response, and found that UNDP's principal asset is its substantial network of Country Offices, Resident Representatives and Resident Coordinators. In many environments, UNDP effectively was perceived as the voice of the international community at the country level. UNDP's principal contribution was found to lie in growing awareness in the case study countries of HIV and AIDS as a development issue and not just as a medical and public health issue. More specific contributions were made in the areas of AIDS governance, leadership, capacity development, mainstreaming, and partnerships. The evaluation found that UNDP Country Offices had given increasing urgency to the HIV and AIDS response in recent years, but that nonetheless the level of urgency was not commensurate with the corporate priority attached to HIV and AIDS or to the importance of the issue as a development problem in the case study countries. UNDP Country Offices need to strengthen their capacity to address HIV and AIDS, and to shift their program focus to supporting implementation and effective use of the significant new inflows of external resources for HIV and AIDS.
Keywords: Evaluation, HIV/AIDS
Presenting author's disclosure statement:
Any relevant financial relationships? No
The 134th Annual Meeting & Exposition (November 4-8, 2006) of APHA