Peacebuilding Fund (PBF)
Guidance Note 5.1
How to use the PBF Global Results Framework
Purpose:
One of the key features of the PBF’s Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system is the Performance Management Plan (PMP). The PMP is PBF’s
Global Results Framework that serves two key purposes outlined below.
First, the PMP provides strategic guidance to RUNOs on how to design and measure PBF’s added value of country project portfolios. The PMP
provides a ‘menu bar’ of indicators that can be used by RUNOs for the design of their specific project or programme results frameworks. It is the
responsibility of the Fund users to decide which of the PMP indicators are project relevant and helpful for the project/ programme at hand and
then to formulate indicators that are specific enough to measure the intended outcome. The use of common indicators across projects and
countries is helpful because it allows the Peacebuilding Support Office (PBSO) to aggregate results from PBF funding and to compare results.
Second, the PMP is also used by PBSO as a major reference for the annual reporting of the Fund’s global performance based on the aggregated
country results for each intervention. The annual performance assessment and reporting is a tool for analysing Fund users’ performance.
The PMP indicators can be used as they are articulated in the framework below, or adapted to specific needs of project managers at local level.
The table provides some practical examples from PBF countries in order to demonstrate the links between PMP specific indicators and country
relevant indicators. If requested, the PBSO can provide technical assistance for the formulation of indicators as well as for using them as a
reference point for monitoring and substantive reporting.
PBF PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT PLAN (PMP)
Measuring change that impacts conflict dynamics: Overall results of PBF project portfolios
Conflict factor: Absence / lack of visible state authorities in conflict affected areas
(1) Public confidence and trust: % of PBF supported project portfolios with evidence of positive change in public confidence and trust in state authorities
Conflict factor: Lack of state capabilities of crowd control / mob violence
(2) Non-relapse into conflicts: % of countries out of total PBF portfolio which did not relapse into conflict a) during period of PBF engagements and b) within 3 and 6 years after PBF funding
begins
Conflict factor: Perception of threat / distrust among ethnic groups / lack of equity in access to limited resources
(3) Peaceful coexistence: % of countries out of total PBF supported project portfolio with evidence that national reconciliation has been improved through the engagements of youth, women,
marginalized groups in conflict-affected communities, playing an active role in strengthening social cohesion between potentially conflicting groups at local
Conflict factor: Blockage of the peace process
(4) Catalytic leverage: % of PBF supported project portfolios with evidence of catalytic leverage either a) in terms of overall peace building relevant processes and institutional reforms, or b)
additional funding commitments for peace relevant sectors, both unleashed by PBF results achievements.
Priority Area 1. Support to Implementation of Peace Agreements and Political Dialogue
PBF Results (outcomes) for measuring
programme effectiveness
1. Security sector reforms and judiciary systems
put in place and providing services and goods at
national and local level that reinforce the Rule of
Law (RoL)
Theory of change
PBF programme practice is effective if it results in
more functional institutions of justice and security
providing fair and competent services to the
population, and reducing then frustration and the
potential for instrumentalization of populations to
PMP indicators for measuring global Fund performance as
aggregated country results that
1.1 Public security / SSRs:
# of PBF supported projects where national armed forces and police
perform their duties in conflict affected territorial areas addressing
security concerns of the target populations
(disaggregated by type of duties, urban / rural areas)
1.2
Access to RoL : # of PBF supported projects where communities use
Indicator examples for measuring
country specific results
Outcomes of IRF / PRF portfolios
-Improved discipline and
performance of police (GUI)
-Improved efficiency in State
security institutions (NEP)
-Reduced break-outs of violent
incidents during elections (GUI)
-Increased responsiveness of law
enforcement institutions protecting
safety to local people (LIB)
Project specific outputs needed
to achieve intended outcomes
-# of security agents trained and
deployed for ensuring public
security in x ‘hot spot areas’ (BDI,
LIB, SL)
Outcomes of IRF / PRF portfolios
-Reduced court case backlog (LIB)
undertake violent or extra-legal action
transitional justice systems to resolve conflicts/disputes without recourse -Enhanced access to judicial
to violence ensuring the respect of Human Rights of women and girls in services around the country (LIB)
-Law reform eliminates gender
particular
(disaggregated by type of conflicts, ethnicity and gender)
1.3
1.4
Reintegrate ex-combattants: # of PBF projects that have successfully
integrated ex-combatants into communities or national security forces
(disaggregated by type of returnees, ethnicity and gender
Implement Peace Agreements: # of PBF projects with evidence that
inclusive dialogue drives the implementation process of peace
agreements (disaggregated by type of agreements implemented
discrimination (CEDAW, SC1325,
1820); (BDI, KYR)
Project specific outputs needed
to achieve intended outcomes
Additional judiciary staff hired &
trained to speed up proceeding
Outcomes of IRF / PRF portfolios
Growing confidence and
participation in democratic system
(e.g. vote, inter-act with gov
officials, conflict mediation skills),
BDI, CAR. LIB
-Ratio of male/female excombatants reintegrated (DRC)
-Acceptance in the communities to
which they returned (SUD, DRC,
CAR
Project specific outputs needed
to achieve intended outcomes
-Targets of DDR of specific groups
met (SUD)
Outcomes of IRF / PRF portfolios
-% of peace agreement provisions
being implemented; (BDI)
Technical quality of provisions
Project specific outputs needed
to achieve intended outcomes
-Dialogue process resumed
Priority Area 2. Promote coexistence and peaceful conflict resolution
PBF Results (outcomes) for measuring
programme effectiveness
PMP indicators for measuring global Fund performance as
aggregated country results that
Indicator examples for measuring
country specific results
2. Conflicts resolved peacefully and in a manner
2.1
that supports the coexistence of all relevant
actors/groups that were involved in conflicts that
undermine peace building efforts
Theory of change:
PBF programme practice is effective if social
cohesion at local level becomes a key driver for
national reconciliation through inclusive partnerships,
the strengthening of democratic institutions and civil
society organizations to contribute to the
management of root causes of conflicts
National Reconciliation: # of PBF country projects with effective partnerships
and procedures in place that maintain regular inclusive policy dialogue to
address issues of conflict, instability and political participation
(disaggregated by: type of inclusive partnership: political parties, civil society
organizations, marginalized groups, traditional and religious leaders, and type
of issues addressed)
Outcomes of IRF / PRF portfolios
-Enhanced cross-cultural
understanding among youth
-Representative participation of
women in dialogue, conflict
resolution and peacebuilding
process
-Reduction of incidents of gender
based violence
-Effective implementation of TRC
agreements
Project specific outputs needed
to achieve intended outcomes
-Independent, non partisan media,
respecting diversity
2.2
Democratic Governance: # of PBF country projects with democratic
institutions in place bearing the trust and confidence of target populations to
address most urgent legacy of human rights including corruption
(disaggregated by type of commissions / institutions
2.3
Access to Resources: # of PBF country projects with mechanisms in place to
address peacefully disputes grounded in competition for access to land and
use of limited resources (e.g. land, water)
(disaggregated by type of mechanism and dispute (gender, ethnicity)
Outcomes of IRF / PRF portfolios
- Dedicated, autonomous Human
Rights, Land etc. Commissions
settle disputes and manage
conflicts in transparent and timely
fashion at national and local levels
(BDI, LIB)
-% of women testimonies in TRC
-Voter turn-out rates
increased/election related violence
reduced (LYB, SL)
-Active anti-corruption body rules
and acts on cases (SL)
Project specific outputs needed
to achieve intended outcomes
- National Commission for Human
Rights established (BDI)
- Election officials and riot police
trained and deployed (SL)
Outcomes of IRF / PRF portfolios
- Effective resolution of land
disputes (property rights) to resume
agricultural production (BDI, LIB)
- Increased access to economic
resources for women headed
households (inheritance, land rights
etc) (GUI)
Project specific outputs needed
to achieve intended outcomes
-National and local capacities to
address disputes and/or emerging
conflicts enhanced
- Increased access to justice
mechanisms (CAR)
Priority Area 3: Revitalise the economy and immediate peace dividends
PBF Results (outcomes) for measuring
programme effectiveness
3. Youth, women and other marginalized
members of conflict affected communities, act as
a catalyst to prompt the peace process and early
economic recovery
PMP indicators for measuring global Fund performance as
aggregated country results that
3.1 Creation of peace dividends: # of PBF country projects where youth,
women and other conflict affected groups acknowledge job opportunities
that flow from the supply and demand of the labour market as peace
dividends
(disaggregated by: ethnicity, gender, urban and rural areas
Theory of change
PBF programme practice is effective if youth with
opportunities to articulate political and social views
peacefully (engagement) and earn livelihoods are
less easily instrumentalized into extra-legal political
conflict and mob violence.
3.2
Livelihood Opportunities: # of PBF country projects generating
sustainable livelihood opportunities to IDP, refugees, victims of war and
others in need in conflict affected communities
(disaggregated by: Target groups (IDPs, refugees, victims of war,
youth,women), ethnicity, urban and rural areas
Indicator examples for measuring
country specific results
Outcomes of IRF / PRF portfolios
-Enhanced capacity of youth to
interact with local government
officials and access economic
services
- change of perceptions of youth
and women
-Equal rights to economic assets for
women granted
-Food security of population at large
increased
Project specific outputs needed
to achieve intended outcomes
-Vocational training centres
providing quality trainings
(CAR,KYR)
-No. of community service projects
completed (water, drainage, road
repair, that provided skill training
and income for youth and women at
risk
Outcomes of IRF / PRF portfolios
-IDP/refugees returned to
communities of their origin (Sri
Lanka)
Project specific outputs needed
to achieve intended outcomes
- No of food for work
initiatives provided to
deplaced households (in
especially to women
headed households)
3.3
Private sector engagement: # of PBF country projects where
partnerships with the private sector play an active role in the delivery of
peace dividends
(disaggregated by: ethnicity, gender; urban and rural areas)
Outcomes of IRF / PRF portfolios
-Increased investment of private
sector, e.g. numbers of new jobs
and businesses created
Project specific outputs needed
to achieve intended outcomes:
- # of business initiatives
supported
Priority Area 4: (Re-)build essential administrative services and infrastructure
PBF Results (outcomes) for measuring
programme effectiveness
4. Essential functions of government institutions
restored to effectively assume their basic service
delivery duties effectively with particular attention to
the provision of peace dividends
PMP indicators for measuring global Fund performance as
aggregated country results that
4.1 Restoring public administration: # of PBF country projects with functional
administrations in place at local level to resume basic public services
(disaggregated by type administrative functions and related services
Theory of change:
PBF programme practice is effective if it results in
supporting administrative reforms at local level that
address unequal access to basic public services as
underlying conflict cause, and increasing trust of
populations in governments.
Indicator examples for measuring
country specific results
Outcomes of IRF / PRF
portfolios:
-No. of land disputes peacefully
treated by local authorities out of
total number submitted
- Positive trend of increased trust of
local population to state
representatives at local level
Project specific outputs needed
to achieve intended outcomes
-No. of administrative buildings /
infrastructures rebuilt in previously
conflict affected districts
4.2
Public service delivery: # of PBF country projects with evidence that the
delivery of peace dividends of a good quality enhances the credibility and
legitimacy of, and public trust to local state representatives
(disaggregated by type of service delivery, type of beneficiaries: youth, women,
marginalized groups, conflict affected communities)
Outcomes of IRF / PRF portfolios
-Access to basic services of
previously excluded groups
-No. of people (ethnic minorities)
using key services in target areas
Project specific outputs as
needed to achieve intended
outcomes
-No. of targeted communities with
increased access to services