Overview of some UN Planning and Programming Processes (from a conflict prevention & conflict analysis perspective)
UNCT & government
UNDAF
DPA- but could theoretically be
led by other UN entity
Country based Senior Leadership
Team (SRSG, and
DSRSG/RC/HCs)
PCNA
Government (supported jointly by
WB, UN, EU and regional
development banks)
Joint government/UN
Field driven
HQ driven (with the exception of
Libya January 2012 – possible
revision through IMPP review?)
Field driven – approved by HQ
lead department at principal level
Field driven; occurs at request of
country government
Field driven
Development planning &
programming framework of the
UN that responds to national
development priorities. The
UNDAF has to be signed by the
Government.
It is the basis for each agency’s
country plans and workplan
(signed by government and
approved by the agency’s
executive boards).
For UN system to jointly assess a
political crisis, conflict or postconflict situation & (re-)formulate a
strategy for engagement;
triggered by realisation of UN
lacking a strategic vision with
regards to country and/or address
sudden change in country
Provide a shared vision of the
UN’s strategic objectives” and, “a
set of agreed results, timelines,
and responsibilities for the
delivery of tasks critical to
consolidating peace”
The purpose of an ISF is to:
 Bring together the Mission
and the UNCT’s combined
mandates and resources
around an overarching
framework of agreed peace
consolidation priorities
 Prioritize and sequence
agreed elements
 Facilitate an appropriate shift
in priorities and/or resources
 Allow for regular stocktaking
by senior managers
A joint needs assessment process
in a country emerging from
conflict or political crisis to identify
and prioritize needs and activities
to address these needs and to
cost these activities. The
assessment results in a
transitional results framework and
budget for implementation (level
of detail varies).
The official funding instrument for
the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF)
and framework for govt/UNchaired Joint Steering Committee
(JSC) for project approval at field
level. Designed as a one-off
catalytic boost of rapid funding to
increase UN engagement with
national actors, operationality,
effectiveness and donor
confidence. Some PBF set up to
catalyse larger stability and
recovery MDTFs (DRC) or to
expand outreach (Nepal).
Planning & programming
Assessment /Analysis; no
planning
Planning tool at the strategic
outcome level.
Complies relevant assessed info./
justification and outlines overall
planning & programming areas.
External
Internal to UN
Internal to UN but can include
Government and other partners in
discussions/vision
PCNA is a methodology for
creating a common analytical
platform and common platform for
action (Transitional Results
Framework).
External (MoU between UN, WB
and EU – on government request)
Flexible to be aligned to national
development plans
2 to 3 months
Varies. Initial experience 3-6
months
Flexible dependent on context
(to date PCNA timeline’s have
gone from 6 months to 3 years;
4-6 weeks if the existing
frameworks are strong in conflict
analysis and critical peacebuilding
Who leads
HQ/ Field-driven
Purpose & context
Planning/
programming
Strategic Assessment
Internal/ external
Time required for
carrying out the
process
Integrated Strategic Framework
Peacebuilding Priority Plan
External
1
Overview of some UN Planning and Programming Processes (from a conflict prevention & conflict analysis perspective)
UNDAF
Strategic Assessment
Integrated Strategic Framework
PCNA
possible dual phase approach to
allow for quick wins + deep
assessment)
Peacebuilding Priority Plan
needs. 10-16 weeks if further
conflict assessment / baseline is
to be developed.
Flexible dependent on national
context Aligned to national
planning cycle
Not applicable
Time period set by the field. In
principle shorter than a
development framework and
longer than a mission mandate
(e.g. 12-18 months).
18 to 36 months
2 years
Specific features of
process (value,
scope)
Four steps: road map; country
analysis; strategic planning;
monitoring & evaluation. All steps
are mandatory but UNCTs can
undertake each in a flexible
manner (i.e. no specific process
prescribed for each step).
Incorporates range of modalities:
UNCT meetings; retreats;
thematic working groups;
consultation with nat’l govt and
civil society
Task force: strategic assessment
(includes work plan, desk review,
field visit, report – incl. conflict
analysis, priority objectives,
strategic options)
Process can build confidence
internally between agencies when
conducted well. Ownership of
report by agencies is important
but consensus is not the goal.
Process facilitation adds
significant value
ISFs can take different forms
depending on the context: they
can be brief high level strategic
papers or detailed plans
sometimes part of the UNDAF
Modular approach: take from
toolkit what’s needed in specific
context
Recognition that process of
conducting PCNA is as important
as outcome;
The basic structure of process
includes a pre-assessment,
assessment and implementation
and monitoring. Validation by
stakeholders of the process and
product is essential
PBF designed to prioritise and
quickly focus on critical, catalytic
actions to Avoid a lapse/relapse of
conflict. Ideally implemented
within ISF /UNDAF as specific
complementary activities –
catalysing additional resources
(fast, relevant, catalytic)
Leads to
UNDAF Results Matrix
Annual Review (aligned with
national review process) and
agency specific country
programmes
Report with policy
recommendations to be submitted
to Policy Committee, for decisionmaking on strategic options
Shared vision and analysis
Strategic objectives, results,
timelines, responsibilities
Coordination and implementation
arrangements
Monitoring
Transitional Result Framework,
joint (national and international)
recovery plan. Donor conference
most of the time
PPP: Short document (8 pages)
drawing priority short - mediumterm peacebuilding needs from
existing assessments and plans
(PCNA, ISF, UNDAF / Govt.
PRSP etc.)
UNDAF exist in all countries with
a UN presence/programme and
they are normally revised every 5
years with exceptions granted.
Note: sometimes the ISF is
developed as a complement to an
UNDAF, which is then known as
UNDAF +
Somalia 2008; Central African
Republic (CAR) 2008; Guinea
Bissau 2009; Libya 2011
NB: note that the similar
assessments led by DPA have
taken place under a different
name
All countries with an integrated
UN presence are mandated to
fulfil the minimum requirements
for an ISF (ISF were developed
during 2011 for most countries
with integrated presence and are
currently under implementation –
Libya has been asked by the PC
to develop an ISF since
establishment of mission)
Iraq, Sudan, Darfur, Somalia,
Haiti, Liberia, Georgia, Pakistan,
Yemen (regional in 2011, national
in 2012)
Countries on Peacebuilding
Commission (PBC) also receive
international support and
marshalling of resources beyond
the PBF: Burundi, Sierra Leone,
Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Central
African Republic.
Countries supported by PBF with
long-term strategies (no IRFs) 2008-11 PBF supported 193
Time frame/ period
covered by
planning/
programming
Examples/ Cases
2
Overview of some UN Planning and Programming Processes (from a conflict prevention & conflict analysis perspective)
Comments
UNDAF
Strategic Assessment
Integrated Strategic Framework
 Challenge to ensure overall
results matrix maintains clear
relationship & remains rooted in
country analysis
 Can serve as ISF, then referred
to as “UNDAF+” (if sufficiently
peacebuilding sensitive and
inclusive of UN peace support
operation)
 Process been simplified: now
integrated results matrix
(results and M&E), and single
set of outcomes (previously two
levels)
 Conflict prevention is one of the
cross-cutting issues to be
incorporated but UNCT
 SA can later lead to ISF/
UNDAF/PCNA depending on
decision taken by policy
committee and UN presence on
the ground
 Factors contributing to success/
failure of SA: to be driven by
country needs; process to be
inclusive & transparent;
leadership by lead agency; level
of collaboration btw HQ & field;
report should reflect
disagreements; good steering of
process; time pressure;
attitudes of member states
 ISF should be translated into
concrete resources & actions by
informs and is informed by RBB,
UNDAF, CAP frameworks,
annual agency workplans
 Using minimum standards
approach, may meet ISF
guidelines using other tools
(e.g. UNDAF). through UNDAF
and country programming
document reviews
 Though field-driven, HQ-based
Integrated Task Force (DPA-led
mission) or Integrated Mission
Task Force (DPKO-led) are
heavily involved in shaping &
conduct of assessment phase of
ISF development . HQ task
forces also organize ISF
support missions.
PCNA



Ensure validation by all
stakeholders
Balance of timeframe
and consultations
Prioritization
Peacebuilding Priority Plan
projects in 22 countries
 PBC is 31 member states
drawn from various UN bodies
and groups
 PBC supported by, and PBF
managed by Peacebuilding
Support Office (PBSO) in NY.
lessons learned thus far:
importance of very good conflict
analysis as basis for plan;
further work needed on M&E;
revision of areas of support
(peace dividends/social and
administrative services)
undertaken in 2011
3