Background Document for UNDG Meeting
29 January, 2009
Agenda item 6
Terms of Reference for Functional Review of DOCO
Terms of Reference for the Functional Analysis and Organizational Redesign of the
UN Development Operations Coordination Office (UNDOCO)
(a)
Rationale:
Under the leadership of the United Nations Development Group (UNDG) Chair, and with the
guidance of the UNDG, the overall objective of the UN Development Operations Coordination
Office1 (UNDOCO) is to support high quality coordination of the UN’s development activities
at the country level performed by the UN Resident Coordinators (RCs) and the UN Country
Teams (UNCTs), as well as the work of the Regional Director Teams. The UN Development
Group Office (UNDGO), the previous name for UNDOCO, was created in 1997 to support the
UNDG members to function in a more unified, cooperative and coherent framework. In
October 2007, the UNDG was integrated into the Chief Executives Board (CEB), as its third
committee. Subsequently in August 2008, the UNDG agreed upon a framework in “The
Management and Accountability System of the UN Development and Resident Coordinator
System, including a ‘functional firewall’ for the RC System” which, together with its
Implementation Plan, provide UNDOCO with enhanced responsibilities. Specifically, the
Management and Accountability system document called for a Functional Analysis of
UNDOCO to examine new and existing roles, identify capacity gaps (especially for DOCO’s
support to the RDT and MDTF mechanisms) and recommend a new structure to best allow
UNDOCO to perform these roles, as foreseen in the Management and Accountability system
document.
(b)Objectives:
The objectives of this review are:
1. To examine and operationalise the roles and functions of UNDOCO that have been
agreed by the CEB and the UNDG;
2. To
conduct a functional analysis of UNDOCO on its role, responsibilities and
functions, as agreed by the CEB and the UNDG;
3. To determine the best organizational design that combines cohesive structures with
efficient processes and systems and promotes synergy and flexibility; and
4. To assess the capacity needed to perform the functions with clarity of roles and
responsibilities.
1
Further detailed background information on both UNDG and UNDOCO can be found at: www.undg.org
(c) Background and context:
UN Reform and the UNDG:
The UNDG2 was established in 1997 to guide UN Reform in response to the UN General
Assembly’s endorsement of former Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s report on “Renewing the
United Nations: A programme of Reform”. An Executive Committee (ExCom) comprising
UNDP, UNICEF, UNFPA and WFP was formed to guide the management and implementation
of the reform process among the Funds, Programmes, Specialized Agencies and UN
Secretariat Departments that are active in development at country level. Since 1997 the
UNDG has gradually expanded in membership, and today consists of 28 members and 5
observers. The primary purpose of the UNDG is to support more coherent and effective
country-level activities, both normative and operational. As stated above, the work of the
UNDG has been supported on a day to day basis since 1997 by the UN Development Group
Office (UNDGO).
In October 2007, following a review of the Chief Executives Board (CEB), the UNDG became
the third committee of the CEB, alongside the High Level Committee for Programme (HLCP)
and the High Level Committee for Management (HLCM). The division of labour among the
three committees has been streamlined and clarified, and UNDG’s overall objective has been
agreed as “coordinating the approach to operational activities at country level” 3. In this
light, UNDGO was renamed the UN Development Operations Coordination Office to better
reflect its dual function as secretariat to the UNDG, as well as supporting country level
coordination through the Resident Coordinator (RC) System. The UNDG has recently
approved a new Management and Accountability system, which provides a clear framework
in which both accountability and management can be exercised effectively by the different
actors and levels of the UN development system, with a focus on the RC System. The
framework has implications for all levels of the system, and outlines specific responsibilities
for UNDOCO.
UNDOCO:
The overall objective of UNDOCO is to support the UNDG’s mandate (as outlined in the
rationale above). It provides a linkage between the UNDG HQ level discussion and the work
of the UN system at country and regional levels, working through the RC System. UNDOCO
works with the UNDG entities and other key partners within the UN System (DPA, DPKO,
DSS, WB and OCHA in particular) to facilitate preparation of issues, policies and guidelines
for decision by the full UNDG, endorsement by the CEB as necessary and technical support
of translation of these into UNDG guidance tools for the RC System at country and regional
levels.
2
All relevant policy documents and relevant historical information - including the latest CEB and UNDG agreements, General
Assembly guidance via TCPR, the 2007 streamlining of the UNDG working groups and other policy decisions on operational
activities will be provided to the successful bidder
3
UNDG Statement of purpose, approved by the UNDG in June 2008
2
UNDOCO as a unit has been hosted by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
since 1997, with the Director of UNDOCO reporting to the UNDG Chair. A key part of the
new UNDG structure has been the establishment of an UNDG Advisory Group on Country
Operations, composed of 13 members. The Advisory Group convenes at both Principal and
Assistant Secretary General (ASG) – Assistant Director General (ADG) levels and provides
“effective guidance to the UNDG Chair on progress with UN coherence and management of
the RC System, and monitoring UNDOCO performance”4.
UNDOCO has a total of 32 professional staff and 11 support staff 5. Of these, four
professionals and six general service posts are funded by UNDP; there are also Junior
Professional Officers (JPOs), and project staff funded by donors. Reporting directly to the
UNDOCO Director are four Associate Directors seconded from UNDP, UNFPA, UNICEF and
WFP. The current organizational structure includes a Directorate, a business unit and four
clusters: Programme Issues and Global Quality Standards; Resident Coordinator System
Support; Post-Crisis Coordination Support; and Country Office Business Operations and
Funding Issues.
For 2008-09, UNDP has budgeted (in the Biennial Support Budget) regular resources to
support UNDOCO of $4.2 million. UNDOCO also mobilizes extra-budgetary funds from
donors to its UN Country Coordination Fund. 13 donors currently contribute to this fund 6.
The main functions of UNDOCO can be divided into two broad dimensions:
1. An important function is to support UNDG mechanisms in the development of better
ways to work together in country level development operations (policies, procedures,
protocols, guidance, etc). This work is carried out through the full UNDG, the Advisory
Group and the UNDG technical working groups. UNDOCO supports the workings of all of
these UNDG Groups.
2. The majority of UNDOCO’s work is to support to the introduction and application of
agreed new ways of working together at country level through support to RC System
and enhanced coordination of country operations. The work related to the RC System
includes supporting a coherent inter-agency oversight function at headquarters and regional
level that can monitor and review progress achieved, as well as a dispute resolution
mechanism.
4
The Management and Accountability System of the UN Development and RC System, including the “functional firewall” for the
RC System, 27 August 2008, page 3
5
As at 9 September 2008 – detailed personnel information on DOCO will be provided to the successful bidder
6
Detailed financial information on UNDOCO funding will be provided to the successful bidder
3
The two dimensions above are addressed by the same staff members in UNDOCO,
supporting the UNDG technical working groups to develop new policies and procedures and
also providing support and day to day guidance to RC Offices and UNCTs, including through
trainings and trouble-shooting when UNCTs experience problems in the implementation of
the policies and procedures. The “living link” provided by UNDOCO staff between HQ
discussions and country level reality is an important asset of UNDG, being the Country
Operations pillar of the CEB. Through collection of concrete UNCT experiences, UNDOCO
staff also support UNDG mechanisms in improving and refining agreed ways of working
together.
Challenges and Opportunities:
In light of the agreed role of the UNDG as an integral part of the CEB, the role of UNDOCO
in adequately supporting the UNDG, as well as the current and additional responsibilities
assigned to UNDOCO by the Management and Accountability System, UNDOCO now needs
to assess its capacity and organizational structure to deliver on them. This review must
consider key challenges and opportunities that could influence and shape the way UNDOCO
will work as it moves forward. Stakeholders and especially the UNDOCO clients within the
system will need to share their views on the services UNDOCO is and should be providing
for the UNDG and their views on how to approach the reconfiguration to ensure
representation and ownership by the entire UNDG.
(d) Scope of work and methodology:
Technical expertise, with in-depth knowledge of Organizational Development, is required to
perform the functional review and organizational redesign of UNDOCO. The functional
analysis must consider UNDOCO’s strategic positioning within the UN system (as secretariat
to the UNDG), a clear definition of the service needs of its clients, the future goals and
needs of its diverse stakeholders, as well as challenges and opportunities. Under the
leadership of the Director of UNDOCO, the consulting firm will work closely with UNDOCO
and its key stakeholders and clients (UNDG members, CEB, AG, RDTs, RC Offices etc.) to
undertake the interdependent phases and steps below. In the event that this functional
review would have any implications on individual staff, the rules and regulations of their
respective agencies would be followed.
Phase 1:
1. Scan the internal and external environments and undertake comprehensive
stakeholder and client consultations to understand the background, current
environment and key drivers that impact the work of UNDOCO
a. Review background documentation on UNDOCO’s past and existing
organizational structure, functions and staff as well as the history, evolution
and future directions of UNDOCO, UNDG, its governance structure and UN
reform, including expected implementation of recent management decisions
on UNDG and UNDOCO;
b. Consult with stakeholders and clients, including UNDOCO staff, to understand
their requirements and expectations for support from UNDOCO. This will
include a thorough review of the UNDG Working Groups, the Regional
Directors Teams, HCLM and HCLP secretariats, other UNDOCO relevant
4
coordination mechanisms to understand the division of labour and the interrelationships;
c. A review and comparison of UNDOCOs current functions with those of other
coordination mechanisms in the United Nations system, to understand the
important lessons to be learned by benchmarking UNDG and UNDOCOs work
against that of entities such as the IASC and OCHA, and UNAIDS;
d. Examine key drivers in the development and aid environments (e.g. TCPR and
others) that impact the work of UNDOCO;
e. Identify key lessons learned from similar exercises in UN agencies and the
private sector that could be applied to this analysis.
2. Analyse UNDOCO’s vision, mission, and goals and identify strategic
imperatives that could shape their future
a. Confirm UNDOCO’s vision, mission and goals, and recommend changes, if
any, that would better reflect its agreed role in the UN system;
b. Identify key drivers that could better position UNDOCO to meet these goals.
3. Develop a framework for the functional analysis that identifies the ideal
functions needed to provide effective coordination and support to
stakeholders
a. Develop a functional framework that identifies a model of what makes a
coordination office effective:
i. Identify functions that contribute to high performance and high quality
products and services that contribute to the UN development agenda
in an environment with many different stakeholders;
ii. Conduct focus groups that include different stakeholders and clients to
understand their needs and expectations;
b. Use the framework to assess current and future functional requirements.
4. Using the framework developed under step 3 as the reference point,
diagnose the requirements for UNDOCO, considering stakeholder needs and
expectations
a. Analyze the current situation (“as is”) in view of stakeholder and client
expectations and requirements for the future, assessing UNDOCO’s existing
roles, functions, and staffing (including levels and competencies) to identify
strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and challenges, including how these
roles and functions are interrelated, and how and why these functions may be
redesigned to be more effective. This will include comprehensive consultations
with UNDOCO’s key clients at the UNDG HQ and regional levels and also
importantly at the country level, using videoconferencing with at least two to
three RC offices per region, applying selection criteria to be established by
UNDOCO but likely including pilot/non-pilot status, development and postcrisis transition countries, large and small, etc.. Consultations will include a
visit to the European based UN agencies, and may also include external, nonUN stakeholders as deemed appropriate;
b. Using the functional framework, identify needs for the future, considering
additional functions required by the new mandate and stakeholder/client
requirements and expectations (“to be”), and perform a gap analysis to
identify the difference between the current and desired functional needs as
well as redundancies that may exist in the current organization;
c. Analyse current and identify new business processes, practices and
mechanisms that would support the fulfilment of these needs, considering
cross-functional and inter-agency implications (this will include an analysis of
5
how much time and resources DOCO currently allocates to various types of
activities (e.g., preparation of guidelines; coordination of working group
meetings and task teams; resource mobilization and donor relations;
providing advice to Delivering as One pilot countries, etc);
d. Determine the options for how UNDOCO structure could/should be
redesigned, considering the desired functions and needs and how they could
be clustered to better fulfil UNDOCO’s goals, meet the needs of the
stakeholders, avoid overlap and increase the effectiveness of the
organization. Reconfiguration options should consider the structure, number
of posts, levels and competencies required, in addition to any potential
structural impact of the anticipated UNDG ASG position;
e. Prioritize potential changes and determine which changes should be
considered based on importance to UNDOCO’s strategic vision, UNDG’s goals,
realities and constraints, costs, and stakeholder expectations.
5. Recommend changes to functions, structure, resourcing, staffing and
processes
a. Recommend the optimal functions to meet the stakeholders’ needs. This will
include recommending potential cost savings and efficiency gains in the
operations of UN-DOCO; if any current functions will no longer be done by
UNDOCO, recommend if needed and where they could be handled;
b. Recommend the best organizational structure to carry out the desired
functions and meet the requirements of the UN system in a cost-effective
manner, including costing of the proposed structure. Consideration will be
given to the current situation of the four seconded Associate Directors and
how the growing involvement of other UN agencies can be reflected in the
staffing of the senior posts.
c. Recommend options of resourcing the proposed structure (consideration will
be given on how to better balance between core and voluntary funding);
d. Recommend optimal staffing, responsibilities and accountabilities based on
the proposed structure (# posts, levels, competencies), considering
alternative ways of building capacity;
e. Recommend changes to or new key business processes, practices and
mechanisms that would strengthen inter-functional and inter-agency
coordination, cooperation and accountability within the proposed structure;
f. Identify potential risks, constraints and limitations of the recommended
functions and organizational structure.
6. Present recommendations sequentially to UNDOCO, the UNDG AG and the
UNDG Chair
a. Discuss recommendations with oversight entities, identifying expected
outcomes, risks, constraints, limitations and cost;
b. Distribute recommendations to stakeholders for comments;
c. Obtain endorsement of recommendations.
Phase 2 (after endorsement of recommendations):
7. Develop results-oriented implementation plan including costing of proposed
changes
a. Develop plan for managing the change process, including a communication
plan to roll out the changes, and mechanisms to ensure effective
implementation (e.g. inter-agency working group);
6
b. Develop implementation plan that clearly identifies results-based actions,
timelines, responsibilities, and resources, as well as risks, constraints,
challenges and opportunities inherent in the new structure and functions;
c. Develop high-level profiles and job descriptions based on the new structure;
d. Develop results-based measurements for monitoring and evaluation and
recommend a plan for effective oversight;
e. Determine cost of approved changes and recommend how it will be funded.
(e) Deliverables:
The key deliverables include the following:
Phase 1:
1. Through a process of stakeholder consultations, a validation of UNDOCO’s vision ,
mission and goals, including an in-depth client/stakeholder analysis;
2. A functional framework, to use as a model to assess optimal functions
3. A functional analysis, reflecting what functions will be undertaken in UNDOCO and
the high-quality support and services that will be provided to its clients;
4. Recommendations on options for a restructured UNDOCO that reflects UNDG’s vision
of a UNDOCO that has the ability to deliver high-quality support and services, defines
the roles and responsibilities of UNDOCO in relation to all UNDG members at HQ,
Regional and Country levels, and identifies cross-functional and inter-agency
business processes, mechanisms and business practices to accompany the proposed
structure;
5. Resource requirements for staffing (number of posts, levels, competencies) and how
to fund.
Phase 2:
1. Definition of change management process, including communication plan for roll-out;
2. Implementation plan, including results-based actions, timelines, responsibilities, key
metrics, milestones, resources and costs;
3. Monitoring and evaluation plan for effective oversight of the implementation by the
Advisory Group;
4. High-level profile and job descriptions for newly proposed and changed posts.
(f) Timeframe:
Phase 1 of the project would start in early 2009, with expected completion by mid 2009.
Following the acceptance of Phase 1 recommendations, Phase 2 would take place from mid
2009 through year end 2009.
(g) Expertise required:
The consulting firm should have state-of-the-art, in-depth knowledge and expertise in the
field of Organizational Development with a combination of the following qualifications:
7







Consultant experience: 15+ years for Senior Experts and 5+ years for Junior Experts in
organizational analysis, redesign and business process reviews. Work experience in
private, public and non-profit sector is essential.
Consulting firm must have demonstrated experience in working with, or supporting, the
development of new and innovative approaches, particularly in all areas relating to
capacity assessment and human resources.
Proven track record in human resource development, knowledge management and goal
alignment.
International expertise, in particular knowledge of the UN and the latest development
and deliberations in relation to the UN reform, for provision of appropriate
recommendations and identification of the most crucial area for business model
improvement.
Ability to translate strategic thinking and innovative ideas into practical operational
recommendations.
In-depth knowledge of Organizational Development concepts, tools and techniques.
Strong knowledge of inter-organizational coordination roles and functions.
8