In a world of crisis, evidence is needed more than ever to tackle hunger.
Evaluations deliver the evidence that helps tell us what works, what doesn’t and why, contributing to greater accountability, improved learning and enlightened decision making.
This report – the second produced under the WFP Evaluation Policy 2022 – maps evaluations conducted, presents evidence insights and measures the performance of WFP’s evaluation function in 2023.
The evaluation was a door opener to start having a neutral conversation on what WFP can do to support the Government in the Dominican Republic (More)
Gabriela Alvarado
Country Director
WFP Dominican Republic
Not only did the government acknowledge WFP’s role in Cuba, the evaluation results and the importance of the partnership, they also valued the evaluation process: the way it was done, and the transparency with which the results were presented.
Etienne Labande
Country Director
WFP Cuba
Evidence gives you a believable story…Our evaluations really lend themselves to putting evidence behind the things we do; the how of it, and the explaining of it (More)
Barbara Clemens
Country Director
WFP Ghana
Evaluation findings gives us that neutral and independent lens that we can go to any of our partners and other stakeholders and they would have greater confidence in WFP’s contribution in a country like the Philippines.
Dipayan Bhattacharyya
Country Director ad interim
WFP Philippines
Evaluations give us the assurance that our programmes are achieving the intended outcomes. More than ever communities we support, donors and governments are asking us to show the impact of what we do.
Christine Mendes
Deputy Country Director
WFP Zimbabwe
Evaluation is very much worth the investment because without it we really cannot sharpen up our interventions. When we have the evidence of previous interventions, we get smarter with subsequent ones.
Housainou Taal
Country Director
WFP Central African Republic
We need more evaluations that help change the dialogue with big donors (More)
Lauren Landis
Country Director
WFP Kenya
Evaluation becomes very critical in a context like Iraq where I need to be able to explain to donors about our impact, but also understand as a manager where we are falling short and fixing it.
Ally Raza Qureshi
Country Director
WFP Iraq
44
evaluations
completed
49
countries
covered
311
recommendations
due to be
implemented
Centralized evaluations are commissioned and managed by OEV and presented to the Executive Board for consideration. They focus on corporate strategies and policies, global programmes, strategic issues and themes, corporate emergencies and CSPs
Decentralized evaluations are commissioned and managed by country offices, regional bureaux and headquarters-base ddivisions other than OEV. They can cover activities, pilots, themes, transfer modalities or any other area of action at the subnational, national or multi-country level. They are not presented to the Board
Impact evaluations are managed by OEV at the request of country offices. They measure changes in development outcomes of interest for a target population that can be attributed to a specific programme or policy through a credible counterfactual. They are not presented to the Executive Board
This map shows where evaluations on WFP and partner activities happened in 2023 and their subject of focus. WFP evaluations are conducted by independent professionals in accordance with United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG) norms and standards. The three categories of evaluation at WFP are centralized, decentralized and impact.
Centralized evaluations are commissioned and managed by the Office of Evaluation. They are presented to the Executive Board and designed to be relevant to the dynamic programming of WFP.
27
completed
31
ongoing
14
new evaluations
in 2023
Centralized evaluations are commissioned and managed by OEV and presented to the Executive Board for consideration. They focus on corporate strategies and policies, global programmes, strategic issues and themes, corporate emergencies and CSPs
Decentralized evaluations are commissioned and managed by country offices, regional bureaux and headquarters-base ddivisions other than OEV. They can cover activities, pilots, themes, transfer modalities or any other area of action at the subnational, national or multi-country level. They are not presented to the Board
Impact evaluations are managed by OEV at the request of country offices. They measure changes in development outcomes of interest for a target population that can be attributed to a specific programme or policy through a credible counterfactual. They are not presented to the Executive Board
A successful strategic shift. Evaluations in 2023 found that in many countries WFP has successfully transitioned from largely directly implementing food and nutrition security programmes to a more enabling role, supporting national partners to provide hunger solutions while maintaining its traditional emergency response capacity. Approaches contributing to the strategic shift included:
National stakeholders welcomed this shift, which helped to bring WFP closer to central decision making. However, evaluations found that systemic and structural barriers remain. Specifically:
Volatile contexts and sudden emergencies have required WFP to adapt swiftly. In all the operational settings evaluated, plans for the strong enabling role envisioned in CSPs were threatened by emergencies such as natural disasters, conflict and political and economic shocks.
Country offices accordingly needed to engage in various forms of crisis response alongside existing CSP activities. To support adaptation, WFP used the CSP budget revision tool and added emergency-focused strategic objectives. However, this did not always result in fully cohesive CSP implementation. Crisis response activities were not always aligned with other areas of work and exit strategies.
Evaluations revealed that the urgency of emergency responses sometimes overtook planned CSP strategic or programmatic work, resulting in non-alignment of activities. Moreover, some CSPs separated emergency preparedness activities from emergency response, which impeded crisis response when needed. Other CSPs lacked clear exit strategies from emergency interventions.
Evaluations recommend
Strategic outcome 1: People are better able to meet their urgent food and nutrition needs
Evaluations found that:
Strategic outcome 2: People have better nutrition, health and education outcomes
Evaluations found positive results for both school meals and nutrition activities:
However, activities were not always well-integrated, and pilot projects were not always analysed to inform their potential scale-up.
Strategic outcome 3: People have improved and sustainable livelihoods
Policy evaluations found that WFP’s conceptual framework for resilience was strong, but not fully up to date with current practice. Achievements and gaps were:
Strategic outcome 4: National programmes and systems are strengthened
All the evaluations found that the CSP approach improved the alignment between WFP activities and national systems and programmes. WFP actions, especially in school meals, nutrition and social protection, helped to:
However, WFP did not always analyse national capacities from a systems perspective, nor plan or strategize adequately for capacity strengthening. Corporate monitoring indicators for capacity strengthening were inadequate to capture WFP’s results in that area.
Strategic outcome 5: Humanitarian and development actors are more efficient and effective
WFP provided high-quality and highly valued on-demand logistics and supply chain services. Key results included:
Targeting has room to improve.
As WFP increasingly uses national targeting systems, evaluations found that WFP did not consistently ensure those most in need were targeted. Post-distribution monitoring did not always check the most vulnerable people (identified for targeting) were actually reached. Other limitations included:
Prioritization posed difficult choices.
Under funding pressure to prioritise, evaluations found that WFP made three main choices:
All evaluations found these changes necessary but extremely difficult, leading to rising food insecurity for vulnerable populations.
Evaluations recommend
Performance was mixed:
WFP mostly addressed protection issues, including ensuring beneficiaries’ dignity - for example by conducting risk assessments and then tailoring intervention modalities accordingly. However, the protection needs of some marginalized populations, such as people living with HIV, people with disabilities, young people, women and victims of violence, were not always addressed.
Efforts to address environmental sustainability and climate change concerns were substantial – for example using climate-responsive agricultural practices and "clean cooking" in school canteens. However, they were not always systematic, with CSP and programme designs not always incorporating them. Evaluations found notable staffing and skills gaps in this area.
Attention to gender equality and women’s empowerment was uneven and lacked a transformative lens. Evaluations found variable attention to gender within CSP design and implementation. Gender was successfully mainstreamed across activities in around half of the country programmes evaluated. Factors supporting gender mainstreaming included country office participation in WFP’s corporate gender transformation programme; the development and use of a gender action plan or strategy; dedicated staffing; and the use of a gender resource network. Weaknesses included insufficient staff capacity and expertise; a lack of gender analysis at design stage, and ad hoc rather than systemic or strategic approaches. There was also a focus on achieving equal participation rather than adopting gender-transformative approaches.
There was insufficient focus on disability concerns overall, though some country offices, like that in Malawi, had developed comprehensive disability and social inclusion strategies and approaches.
Significant gaps arose in accountability to affected populations (AAP) including insufficient beneficiary engagement and consultation and/or limited information provided to beneficiaries. Community feedback mechanisms were extensively developed, but often incomplete or underutilized.
Evaluations recommend
Evaluations found that CSPs helped strengthen partnerships with national authorities, enhancing WFP’s role in policy and strategy formulation and increasing its potential to inform national decisions.
However, some country offices lacked a strategic or comprehensive approach to partnerships. Operational partnerships, particularly at the decentralized level, could be broadened and deepened.
Evaluations identified examples of successful WFP advocacy with national or de facto authorities, such as expanding humanitarian access in Burkina Faso and Myanmar, and integrating vulnerable groups into national social protection strategies in the Dominican Republic.
CSPs also helped position WFP strategically within coordinated United Nations engagement on food security and nutrition. However, this strategic coordination did not always translate into strengthened operational collaboration, given the often diverse operational capacities and approaches of the entities involved.
Evaluations found that partnerships with cooperating partners were strong and collaborative and engagement with the private sector increased.
Evaluations recommend
Evaluations identified eight factors – all highly valued by partners – that helped WFP achieve results:
Digital innovation
Evaluations identified a series of digital innovations that benefited government partners in their search for food security and hunger solutions, such as:
Four main factors impeded WFP’s ability to achieve results:
Evaluations recommend
Of the 42 WFP-led evaluations conducted in 2023, one third were rated “highly satisfactory” and two-thirds “satisfactory”. It was the first year that 100 percent of both centralized and decentralized evaluations met satisfaction requirements.
Highly satisfactory
Satisfactory
Partly satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
70 percent of all evaluations originally planned for 2023 were contracted.
Policy evaluations
By the end of 2023, 77 percent of active WFP policies had been or were being evaluated.
Strategic evaluations
While there was no completed strategic evaluation in 2023, 3 strategic evaluations were underway.
CSP evaluations
93 percent of country strategic plans (CSPs) or interim country strategic plans (ICSPs) due for evaluation were evaluated.
Corporate emergency evaluations
80 percent of corporate emergency responses due for evaluation in 2023 were evaluated, rising from 40 percent the previous year.
Evaluation syntheses
An evaluation synthesis drawing evidence from centralized and decentralized evaluations on WFP’s role in the management of, and strategic engagement with, cooperating partners was launched in 2023.
Joint evaluation initiatives and system wide evaluations
In 2023, OEV contributed to two global joint evaluations: on social protection, managed by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV and AIDS (UNAIDS); WFP; the International Labour Organization (ILO) and UNICEF; and the system-wide strategic joint evaluation of the collective international development and humanitarian assistance response to COVID-19 led by the COVID-19 Global Evaluation Coalition of the Development Assistance Committee of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD-DAC). Both will be finalized in 2024.
Decentralized evaluations
Of the 18 country offices ending an ICSP or CSP cycle in 2023, 83 percent had commissioned at least one decentralized evaluation during their planning cycle.
Completed decentralized evaluations by region/headquarters and year of completion, 2022-2023
Total 2022-2023
2022
2023
Abbreviations: HQ = headquarters; RBB = Regional Bureau for Asia and the Pacific; RBC = Regional Bureau for the Middle East, Northern Africa and Eastern Europe; RBD = Regional Bureau for Western Africa; RBJ = Regional Bureau for Southern Africa; RBN = Regional Bureau for Eastern Africa; RBP = Regional Bureau for Latin America and the Caribbean
Impact evaluations
While impact evaluations are not subject to coverage norms and cover anything from 1 to 3-4 years of activities, the first impact evaluation from the cash-based transfer and gender window, in El Salvador, was finalised and published in 2023. WFP Evaluation also met its indicative target of starting six new impact evaluations.
Compared with the previous year, there was a 31.2 percent increase in unique downloads of evaluation products from the WFP website.
9 summaries of evaluation evidence were produced across thematic and geographic lines, continuing an upward trend, while 95 percent of WFP draft policies and CSPs developed in 2023 included explicit reference to evaluation evidence.
Almost two-thirds of evaluation recommendations due in 2023 were implemented on time, slightly lower from centralized evaluations (57 percent) compared with those from decentralized evaluations (69 percent).
For all evaluations completed in 2023, 296 independent evaluator consultants were hired, of whom 43 percent were men and 57 percent were women.
On geographical diversity, the proportion of consultants from developing countries was higher for decentralized evaluations (51 percent) than for centralized evaluations (38 percent).
African States
Latin America and Caribbean States
Asia-Pacific States
Western Europe and other States
Eastern Europe States
WFP continued to work on a wide range of initiatives on evaluation capacity development, at global, regional and country level. A significant milestone was the adoption of the United Nations General Assembly Resolution on strengthening Voluntary National Reviews through country-led evaluation. Through the resolution, Member States are encouraged to use evidence from evaluations for decision-making and for reporting on their progress towards achieving the 2030 Agenda.
The System-Wide Evaluation Office was established with the objective of strengthening the oversight, transparency, accountability and collective learning across the UN Sustainable Development Group. WFP Evaluation pledged support for the revision and finalization of the UN system-wide evaluation policy and continued to engage in supporting UNSDCF initiatives at country level.
In 2023, the overall financial resources available for the evaluation function amounted to US$34.30 million, representing 0.41 percent of total contribution income (US$8.3 billion). The actual expenditure on evaluation in 2023 was US$27.62 million, 0.33 percent of WFP total contribution income.
Programme funds from country portfolio budgets (totalling US$2.25 million) were made available to OEV for CSP evaluations. US$1.99 million was received through the multi-donor trust fund for impact evaluations, adding to a balance on the fund from previous contributions at the start of the year of US$1.54 million. In addition, US$1.48 million was allocated from country portfolio budgets and US$1 million was received in the School Based Programmes Trust Fund as a multi-year contribution for impact evaluation (2023-2025).
US$8.14 million was budgeted for the decentralized evaluation function in 2023.
The contingency evaluation fund provided essential support to two countries for conducting country strategic plan evaluations and ten countries and one regional bureau for conducting decentralized evaluations.
The share of employees from developing countries rose to 25 percent in OEV at headquarters and 62 percent in WFP regional bureaux. In terms of gender diversity, women make up 67 percent of the evaluation function workforce in OEV at headquarters and 76 percent in the regional bureaux.
African States
Latin America and Caribbean States
Asia-Pacific States
Western Europe and other States
Eastern Europe States
The compliance rate in the Executive Director’s annual assurance statements regarding evaluation rose to 97%
