{"id":9932,"date":"2026-09-11T12:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-09-11T12:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/godshand.link\/ground_post\/evaluation-of-mozambique-wfp-country-strategic-plan-2022-2026\/"},"modified":"2026-09-11T12:00:00","modified_gmt":"2026-09-11T12:00:00","slug":"evaluation-of-mozambique-wfp-country-strategic-plan-2022-2026","status":"publish","type":"ground_post","link":"https:\/\/godshand.link\/en_gb\/ground_post\/evaluation-of-mozambique-wfp-country-strategic-plan-2022-2026\/","title":{"rendered":"Evaluation of Mozambique WFP Country Strategic Plan 2022\u20132026"},"content":{"rendered":"


\n<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n \"https:\/\/docs.wfp.org\/api\/documents\/WFP-0000175880\/download\/\"
\n <\/figure>\n
\n <\/p>\n
\n The evaluation of the WFP country strategic plan for Mozambique for 2022\u20132026 was commissioned by the WFP Office of Evaluation to support accountability and learning, with the aim of informing the design of the next country strategic plan for Mozambique.\n <\/div>\n
\n

Mozambique is one of the most climate-vulnerable countries in the world, repeatedly affected by cyclones, floods and droughts. It has also suffered from a protracted conflict in Cabo Delgado, which has driven large-scale displacement and eroded livelihoods. Food insecurity and malnutrition are widespread, with stunting and anemia posing persistent challenges. Institutional capacity remains uneven, development challenges persist, and humanitarian needs continue to outpace available resources.\u00a0<\/p>\n

What were the key findings?\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

The evaluation found that WFP has maintained a strategically relevant and coherent position. The multi-pillar design of the country strategic plan \u2013 combining crisis response, resilience building and systems strengthening \u2013 aligned well with national priorities and the United Nations sustainable development cooperation framework for Mozambique. However, the breadth of engagement at the humanitarian\u2013development\u2013peace nexus sometimes hindered depth and integration, highlighting the need for prioritization and more focused engagement in the next country strategic plan.<\/p>\n

WFP positioned itself as a key actor in emergency response and significantly contributed to enhancing national responsiveness to shocks. Resilience interventions showed promising results in strengthening adaptive capacities, but linkages across humanitarian, resilience and systems strengthening were not always fully realized. WFP strengthened the foundations of the national school feeding programme, and WFP’s common services were critical enablers for partners and government responses.<\/p>\n

What should WFP do?\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

The evaluation made six recommendations:\u00a0<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Sharpen geographic and programmatic priorities, strengthening the integration and sequencing of life-saving assistance with systems development;\u00a0<\/li>\n
  2. Reinforce national systems through targeted technical assistance;\u00a0<\/li>\n
  3. Diversify strategic partnerships;<\/li>\n
  4. Enhance internal efficiency;<\/li>\n
  5. Across programmes, continue to mainstream protection; the participation of women, including in terms of their economic roles and leadership aspects; and considerations related to persons with disabilities and accountability to affected people; and\u00a0<\/li>\n
  6. Expand the use of innovative financing, including through common services and private sector engagement.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div>\n