3.2 Effectiveness: Attainment of objectives and planned results The overall rating for the attainment of objectives and planned results is satisfactory3.2.1 Achievement of the outcomes as defined in the TOC 58.There are two important caveats about the effectiveness section. First, the assessment of the effectiveness of the project is typically based on the extent to which the outcomes, objectives and intended impact were achieved, especially in light of the reconstructed TOC. It is important to emphasise that the reconstructed TOC created by the evaluation team was extremely ambitious.
Final Report Terminal Evaluation of the Project: “Human Rights and the Environment: Good Practices. 24 The process of reconstructing the TOC resulted in the framing of a longer-term lense and the identification of potential pathways that could potentially lead to the desired impact of increased recognition of environmental human rights. Because the project did not advance past the output phase, the evaluation team has reverted to the original TOC as a conceptual framework for evaluating the overall project.59.The second caveat is that typically, this section of a UNEP evaluation would provide a very detailed assessment of the effectiveness of the project outcomes. Since Phase One of the project only progressed through the output stage, there is insufficient evidence to evaluate the achievement of the one outcome “Enhanced knowledge and understanding of good practices to advance human rights and environment objectives among stakeholders in both the environmental and human rights fields.”Therefore this section will provide an abbreviated analysis of the outcome results as well as a more detailed analysis of the achievement of outputs.60.It is important to recall that the achievement of the immediate outcome was in theory a possibility for this project. However, the levels of available staff time and financial resources limited this possibility in practice. Therefore the achievement of outcomes and objectives was rated as MU. 61.The rating for achievement of outcome is moderately unlikely. It may appear at first glance as a harsh rating, but UNEP evaluations must include the assessment of achievement of outcomes. Whilst this has generated a rating in the unsatisfactory range, this is done in in fairness to other projects, and in order to generate the statistics needed for the Evaluation Office to compare across projects. It is clear that the expectations to achieve outcomes and broader impact were unrealistic in the project timeframe and considering the extremely reduced budget (relative to the original budget in the project document). As a result, this project should really be regarded as a project preparation pilot, despite the fact that results at the outcome level were not achieved.