initiatives, including the monitoring arbitration system for studied. Mediators sought the Civil Service by Development Risks: identifying establishment and data contesting Appropriate model and trained. Trial mid-2019. activities. Steady appropriate method to usage of mediation and managerial decisions selected by 2017 run of the rate of increase in measure the indicator dispute settlement or tasking and and subsidiary mediation using the mechanisms. performance legislation drafted mechanisms evaluation by end-2017. in three line plateauing by 2020. judicial ministries by Capacity process is the only 2018. evaluations of CSB course of action show favourable and significant improvements. Mediation /arbitration system operational by end of project. Action Plan 2017-18 Planning meeting Study 1 completed, Study 2 completed, Study 3 completed, Readiness for CSB prepared to 2.4. Baseline, 2016 Methods: Stakeholder under development; with CSB. Study recommendations recommendations recommendations decision-making adapt policies, diversify and final analysis focus – Law on Civil Service topic 1 for Policy presented and presented and presented and ensured for and deepen reforms, evaluations; groups, key informant enters into force in Lab identified, action taken. Study action taken. Study action taken. upgrading the civil based on systematic ongoing interviews, desk review 2017. ToRs agreed and 2 for Policy Lab 3 for Policy Lab service recruitment, analysis of monitoring Risks: identifying study launched. initiated. initiated. evaluation and implementation, data appropriate method to mediation. generated stakeholder measure the indicator feedback and forward planning. Only few academic Topics first round Research reports Topics identified Research reports 2.5. Citizens, civil Baseline, 2016 At least four Methods: Stakeholder and civil society of research grants published and and the second published and society and academia and final institutions have analysis focus – organisations have announced/ recommendations round of research recommendations contribute to PAR evaluations; developed expert groups, key informant sufficient knowledge awarded. discussed in grants announced/ discussed in reform. ongoing capacity in interviews, desk review. to meaningfully Innovation Lab awarded Innovation Lab particular areas of format format PAR and
Development initiatives, including the establishment and usage of mediation and dispute settlement mechanisms. monitoring data arbitration system for contesting managerial decisions or tasking and performance evaluation judicial process is the only course of action studied. Appropriate model selected by 2017 and subsidiary legislation drafted by end-2017. Mediators sought and trained. Trial run of the mediation in three line ministries by the Civil Service by mid-2019. activities. Steady rate of increase in using the mechanisms plateauing by 2020. Capacity evaluations of CSB show favourable and significant improvements. Mediation /arbitration system operational by end of project. Risks: identifying appropriate method to measure the indicator 2.4. CSB prepared to adapt policies, diversify and deepen reforms, based on systematic analysis of implementation, generated stakeholder feedback and forward planning. Baseline, and final evaluations; ongoing monitoring data Action Plan 2017-18 under development; Law on Civil Service enters into force in 2017. 2016 Planning meeting with CSB. Study topic 1 for Policy Lab identified, ToRs agreed and study launched. Study 1 completed, recommendations presented and action taken. Study 2 for Policy Lab initiated. Study 2 completed, recommendations presented and action taken. Study 3 for Policy Lab initiated. Study 3 completed, recommendations presented and action taken. Readiness for decision-making ensured for upgrading the civil service recruitment, evaluation and mediation. Methods: Stakeholder analysis – focus groups, key informant interviews, desk review Risks: identifying appropriate method to measure the indicator 2.5. Citizens, civil society and academia contribute to PAR reform. Baseline, and final evaluations; ongoing Only few academic and civil society organisations have sufficient knowledge to meaningfully 2016 Topics first round of research grants announced/ awarded. Research reports published and recommendations discussed in Innovation Lab format Topics identified and the second round of research grants announced/ awarded Research reports published and recommendations discussed in Innovation Lab format At least four institutions have developed expert capacity in particular areas of PAR and Methods: Stakeholder analysis – focus groups, key informant interviews, desk review. 2018.
Project%20Document%20-%20DFID.docx