Multilateral Aid Review summary - United Nations Peacebuilding Fund (PBF)

The PBF is a central, system-wide UN fund established in 2006. Its purpose is to a) support interventions of direct relevance to early peacebuilding processes and address critical gaps where no other funding is available; and b) support countries at a later stage of their peacebuilding processes where no Multi-Donor Trust Fund has been established and/or where critical peacebuilding interventions remain underfunded.

	comment
Contribution to UK development objectives	Strong
	+	Good strategic fit, both in general and against UK priorities. The PBF fills a crucial gap in the international system to stop countries returning to conflict, and peacebuilding is critically important to the UK’s wider security interests.
	+	All countries receiving PBF funds are at the bottom end of fragility and peace indices.
	+	Relatively predictable source of aid in unpredictable circumstances that are often underfunded.
	_	Performance at country level has been mixed. Although there is an upward trend, the PBF results management needs to improve.
	_	Some evidence of PBF-funded interventions targeted specifically and successfully at the role of women in reconciliation and reconstruction, although the PBF needs clearer policies and structures to promote gender equality.
Organisational strengths	Satisfactory
	_	In spite of recent improvements in the right direction, cost control has not been pursued systematically.
	+	Evidence of national government and civil society involvement, HQ coordination and increasing improvements in partnership behaviour over the past two years, including at the country level.
	+	Shortcomings in strategic and performance management, but the response to internal and external reviews has been very positive.
	+	Overall, PBF’s financial resources management is satisfactory. It has adapted its modalities to be more flexible, and has much improved allocation criteria.
	_	Needs to do more to communicate the rationale behind funding decisions, and to manage poorly performing projects.
	+	There is good accountability but limited transparency.
Capacity for positive change	Likely
	+	Several critical reforms are underway and strong evidence that management has driven progress against reforms.
	+	Good prospect of positive change. Management commitments and strategies outlined in the 2011-2013 Business Plan, and the commitment and joint engagement of other donors.