{"id":9918,"date":"2026-09-10T09:24:04","date_gmt":"2026-09-10T09:24:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/godshand.link\/ground_post\/evaluation-of-wfp-caribbean-multi-country-strategic-plan-2022-2026\/"},"modified":"2026-09-10T09:24:04","modified_gmt":"2026-09-10T09:24:04","slug":"evaluation-of-wfp-caribbean-multi-country-strategic-plan-2022-2026","status":"publish","type":"ground_post","link":"http:\/\/godshand.link\/en_gb\/ground_post\/evaluation-of-wfp-caribbean-multi-country-strategic-plan-2022-2026\/","title":{"rendered":"Evaluation of WFP Caribbean Multi-Country Strategic Plan 2022-2026"},"content":{"rendered":"


\n<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n \"Cover\"
\n <\/figure>\n
\n <\/p>\n
\n Evaluation of WFP’s Multi-Country Strategic Plan for the Caribbean in 2022-2026.\n <\/div>\n
\n

The WFP Caribbean multi-country office operates in an environment where the locations affected by a shock, the types of hazards and the required levels of support cannot be easily predicted. WFP\u2019s level and type of engagement therefore vary across countries, with more sustained engagement in eight countries with satellite offices and interventions across 22 countries and territories in total, at the time of the evaluation.<\/p>\n

What worked \u2013 or didn\u2019t \u2013 and why?<\/strong><\/p>\n

The evaluation found that the multi-country strategic plan provided a relevant and innovative framework for WFP’s engagement in the Caribbean, in a context of high vulnerability despite the middle- or high-income status of countries. WFP clearly defined its comparative advantages in shock-responsive social protection, disaster risk financing and food security data generation. It leveraged its global expertise in emergency response, supply chain management and cash-based programming in support of regional and national frameworks and institutions. The hub-and-satellite model was instrumental in positioning WFP in the region, providing a viable approach to supporting its dual role of enabler and responder.<\/p>\n

WFP contributed to regional and country-level system strengthening in disaster preparedness and response, disaster risk financing and shock-responsive social protection, and effectively augmented government emergency response capabilities. However, there were tensions between responsive programming and systematic capacity strengthening, and cross-cutting priorities were addressed in an ad-hoc, rather than systematic, way.<\/p>\n

What should WFP do?<\/strong><\/p>\n

The evaluation issued four recommendations<\/strong> for the multi-country office:\u00a0<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Sharpen the plan\u2019s strategic focus for capacity strengthening work;\u00a0<\/li>\n
  2. Define a catalytic role for WFP in food systems transformation;\u00a0<\/li>\n
  3. Develop a comprehensive partnership strategy; and\u00a0<\/li>\n
  4. Institutionalize cross-cutting priorities.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div>\n