Table 14: Use of MOPAN SEAH framework

• UNICEF intended to use the MOPAN framework to hold some recipient countries accountable on SEAH.

Table 14: Use of MOPAN SEAH framework

Use…

In acquiring a better understanding of international standards on requirements on SEA and SH and their operational implications across MOs (UN or non-UN, development or humanitarian organisations) In developing SEAH monitoring and assessment systems

As a guiding framework to structure strategy on PSEA

Depends on

• Level of familiarity with the issue, especially outside the UN system • Staff localised at organisational level of operations

• Pre-existing assessment framework • Perception of the legitimacy of MOPAN to represent its members’ expectations • MO degree of participation in the joint quantification process organised by MOPAN on SEAH • Timeliness: many MOs were (re)structuring their SEA and SH strategy when the note was issued • Donors influence regarding monitoring SEAH • Perception of MOPAN’s legitimacy to represent its members expectations • MO degree of participation in the joint quantification process organised by MOPAN on SEAH

This uptake may be reinforced in the future, as some MOPAN member countries plan to use some SEAH indicators in their own MO assessments and perhaps to undertake follow-up actions, if needed (Ireland, Netherlands, UK). The Netherlands and Finland have also backed the use of the MOPAN framework at the board of the organisations in which they are members. However, some MOPAN members are also waiting to judge its overall performance by seeing what the framework outputs will be in practice, with the assessments that should be available for the end of 2021.

Lessons in Multilateral Effectiveness: UNDS Reform

After the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development was adopted in September 2015, the UN Secretary General (UNSG) made proposals to reform the United Nations. The UNDS study was undertaken to provide “MOPAN Members with a general sense of lessons emerging from the reform”. The resident coordinator (RC) system and its funding was a particular area of interest. RCs are UN representatives responsible for co-ordinating UN activities at country-level. This study is the first example of a MOPAN product being mentioned in a UNSCG report. There are several reasons for this:

• It met a specific need. The UNSG had to report on this question to the UN General

Assembly. The study was external and critical, lending support to the findings of internal studies from the development co-ordination office (DCO) and from the office of internal oversight services (OIOS). • MOPAN also put an extra emphasis on timeliness and buy-in. One of the MOPAN study