Implications:
According to the UNDP Guide, if an information system is incorporated into the monitoring and
evaluation of DDR programs, then monitoring of DDR programs will be more effective. During
program implementation, management and staff will have easier and quicker access to information,
enhanced institutional memory, and speedy facilitation of response to questions from donors, media,
etc. Furthermore, the information system will be an excellent resource for evaluation teams during
the desktop review stage of their evaluation. // If a system for managing information is not
incorporated and deployed before a DDR process begins, however, disbursements will not be tracked
as effectively, and accountability may become an issue. Lack of appropriate information management
could also produce security concerns: “For example, information on the payment of benefits for ex-
combatants, if not delivered in a reliable and timely fashion, can translate into frustration or even riots”
(UNDP, p. 43). If biometric data is collected and not handled appropriately, then some ex-combatants
may be less likely to participate. If personal information of ex-combatants is not protected within a
data management system, then registered ex-combatants could be threatened with reprisals if hostilities
break out again. // If secondary data is collected through national sources instead of generated by a
parallel process within the DDR program, then national capacities will be strengthened to promote
sustainability after the program has ended.
“[T]here are also ethical concerns and privacy issues associated with the collection and storage of politically highly sensitive
data with names, detailed information, and biometric data of former members of armed groups. These ex-combatants are
often under significant threat, because armed groups might seek revenge or, in other cases, the national government might
be interested in obtaining their personal data. Therefore, safeguards need to be implemented to protect the privacy and
identity of individuals who take part in DDR programmes” (Seethaler, p. 9).
Event Description:
This lesson is primarily based on UNDP’s “How to Guide: Monitoring and Evaluation for
Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration Programmes,” Bureau for Crisis Prevention and
Recovery, (2009). See also the UNDP’s “Seven Steps for DDR Programme Planners for Integrating
M&E into Programme Design.”
Other useful resources pertaining to M&E of DDR programs include:
• “Assessing the Impact of DDR Programmes: Possibilities and Challenges,” F. Seethaler,
United Nations University Policy Brief, (March 2016).
• “Monitoring and Evaluation of DDR Programmes,” UN, Integrated Disarmament,
Demobilization, and Reintegration Standards (IDDRS) 3.50, Level 3 Structures and Processes,
(1 August 2006).
For more information on M&E reports specifically pertaining to DDR in Liberia, see these resources:
• “Fifteenth progress report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Mission in Liberia,”
UNSCR S/2007/479, (8 August 2007).
• “What the Fighters Say: A Survey of Ex-combatants in Liberia February-March 2006,” J.
Pugel, UNDP in partnership with ANPPCAN, (April 2007).
Lesson Author: Katrina Gehman, Lessons Learned Analyst (Ctr), PKSOI
Table of Contents | Quick Look | Contact PKSOI
7