86 . MOPAN 2017-18 ASSESSMENTS . UNITED NATIONS RELIEF AND WORKS AGENCY FOR PALESTINE REFUGEES IN THE NEAR EAST UNRWA’s participation in joint planning exercises with other UN agencies varies according to Field Office and context. In Lebanon, Gaza and the West Bank, UNRWA takes part in the UNDAF. Similarly, in Syria, UNRWA’s non-humanitarian activities (including those funded by the Programme Budget) are included in UNDAF Strategic Frameworks. In Jordan, UNRWA is not included in the UNCT and UNDAF but coordinates with other agencies through technical working groups and informal mechanisms. UNRWA is accustomed to working in protracted conflicts where crisis management is a recurring need. With this, UNRWA has specific mechanisms in place to facilitate programme adjustment particularly in the face of emergencies. Its Emergency Management framework establishes structures, systems and procedures in place to enable an effective immediate response in the face of emergencies. The embedding of the results-based monitoring system has meant that the agency is increasingly able to forecast, and link expected results with expected resources, thus enabling it to be more agile when emergencies arise. UNRWA’s Accountability to Affected Populations (AAP) framework sets out formal and informal mechanisms, standards and practices at the field and programme level to engage Palestine refugees throughout the programming cycle. The AAP framework focuses on information sharing, information gathering, consultation, participation of vulnerable groups, and complaints and feedback mechanisms to deliver on its commitments to Palestine Refugees. However, Protection Audits highlight that refugee participation can be further and that the practice of refugee participation during the programme management cycle is not thought to be fully embedded across UNRWA. UNRWA is perceived as providing high-quality inputs to policy dialogue that affects the lives of Palestine refugees, although the agency does not have a formal knowledge management/normative function. UNRWA has historically had challenges in its internal knowledge management and identification and dissemination of lessons learned. MI 6.1: Planning, programming and approval procedures enable agility in partnerships when conditions change Score Overall MI Rating Satisfactory Overall MI score 3 Element 1: Mechanisms in place to allow programmatic changes and adjustments when conditions change Element 2: Mechanisms in place to allow the flexible use of programming funds as conditions change (budget revision or similar) Element 3: Institutional procedures for revisions permit changes to be made at country/regional/HQ level within a limited timeframe (less than three months) Element 4: Evidence that regular review points between partners support joint identification and interpretation of changes in conditions Element 5: Evidence that any common institutional bottlenecks in procedures identified and action taken leading to an improvement MI 6.1 Analysis 3 3 N/E N/A 3 Source document UNRWA is accustomed to working in protracted conflicts where crisis management is a recurring need. With this, UNRWA has specific mechanisms in place to facilitate programme adjustment particularly in the face of emergencies. Its Emergency Management framework establishes structures, systems and procedures in place to enable an effective immediate response in the face of emergencies. The embedding of the results-based monitoring system has meant that the Agency is increasingly able to forecast, and link expected results with expected resources, thus enabling it to be more agile when emergencies arise. It is not clear what mechanisms are in place to support programmatic changes and flexible use of funding in non-emergency contexts. 3, 16, 21, 30, 36, 37, 54