Evaluation Office

Decent work results and effectiveness of ILO operations in 2025

What is this report about?

This annual report brings together findings of 45 independent final project evaluations that were conducted in 2025 to understand the extent to which the ILO is advancing decent work and effectiveness of its operations around the world.

It examines what is working well, where improvements are needed, how effectively and efficiently resources are being used, and how results vary across policy areas and regions. The report identifies key trends, lessons learned, good practices and recommendations to strengthen the design and implementation of projects, improve the use of resources, and help the ILO achieve better results through its development cooperation work.

For more than ten years, the ILO's Evaluation Office has carried out these annual assessments to better capture the ILO’s effectiveness in achieving short and medium-term objectives and advancing decent work.

The meta-analysis is based on an assessment of 45 final independent project evaluations conducted in 2025. Information on their performance is based on 29 key performance indicators related to relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability and impact.

Methodology_Decent Work results and effectiveness of ILO operations_ 2026_WEB.pdf - PDF 142.68 KB

How did the ILO's development cooperation interventions perform in 2025?

Strong performance was observed in the strategic relevance, coherence, sustainability, and likelihood of impact of ILO development Cooperation operations.
While effectiveness was generally positive, efficiency showed significant variability, indicating uneven success across key assessed performance areas.
66% of interventions demonstrated a clear orientation towards improving the living standards of poor and vulnerable populations through decent work pathways, with nearly one-quarter obtaining highly successful ratings. Pro-poor performance was strongest when projects combined direct support for vulnerable groups with sustainable livelihoods, social protection, labour rights and institutional reform.
The extent to which ILO interventions were gender-responsive varied across the 2025 portfolio, with positive results in 53% of cases, and no unsuccessful performance. The most successful interventions combined explicit gender strategies, operational measures addressing structural barriers, gender-sensitive monitoring and implementation tools, and institutional partnerships capable of sustaining reforms beyond the project cycle.
20% of interventions had a disability inclusion perspective or specific components targeting beneficiary groups with disabilities, with 45% of cases obtaining unsuccessful ratings. The most successful projects embedded disability responsive approaches directly into their design, delivery systems, and institutional reforms,with concrete operational measures to address barriers faced by persons with disabilities. Evidence showed that even relatively modest operational adjustments could help reduce participation barriers when disability inclusion was intentionally addressed.
Environmental sustainability was integrated unevenly and to a limited extent across the 2025 portfolio of ILO development cooperation interventions, with just 35% of positive cases. Successful performance was associated with interventions that positioned the just transition, green jobs, climate resilience, or environmental sustainability as central components of programme design, linking environmental objectives to concrete economic and institutional mechanisms.

Read chapter 3 for more information

How to optimize resource efficiencies?

Six key insights provide practical information on how to make the most of resource efficiencies in ILO's development cooperation interventions.

Resource efficiency starts with realistic design, proportionate scope and use of exisiting systems.

Projects were generally more resource-efficient when objectives, delivery models and geographic scope matched available means from the outset.

Efficiency was often strengthened when interventions could build on existing ILO tools, lessons from other initiatives, institutional relationships, prior programme investments or established delivery systems rather than creating parallel arrangements from scratch. Shared management functions, joint implementation platforms and coordination mechanisms across projects also helped reduce duplication and generate economies of scale.
The adequacy of resources depends on timely access, deployment and management of resources.

Across the 2022–2025 portfolio, resource adequacy was shaped by the volume of resources available, the timeliness with which they could be accessed, and their availability at the point of implementation.

Evaluations showed that implementation challenges arose both when resources were insufficient and when available resources could not be mobilised or deployed effectively. Procurement processes, disbursement delays, recruitment bottlenecks, contracting procedures and administrative requirements often constrained the use of available resources and slowed delivery of outputs and outcomes.
Adaptive resource management and flexible delivery models sustain efficiency in complex contexts.

Projects operating in fragile, crisis-affected or rapidly changing environments often maintained performance through adaptive resource management. Evaluations highlighted the importance of reallocating budgets, adjusting delivery modalities,
reprioritising activities, redeploying staff and modifying implementation arrangements in response to changing circumstances while preserving progress towards intended results.
Strategic partnerships and co-financing expand results beyond core project resources.

Efficiency increased when ILO projects translated technical cooperation results, partnerships and policy engagement into additional financing, in-kind support or follow-on investments. External resources often expanded project scale, reduced
pressure on core budgets and improved prospects for continuity beyond the project life-cycle.
Staffing capacity, technical expertise and field presence are important enablers of resource efficiency.

Strong staffing arrangements, technical expertise and field-level presence emerged as important contributors to efficient implementation across the portfolio. Projects with strong technical and coordination capacity, supported by active country-office engagement or staff embedded within implementation contexts, were generally better able to maintain stakeholder relationships, support implementation, mobilise partnerships and deliver planned activities, particularly in complex operating
environments.
Resource efficiency remians difficult to measure consistently.

A cross-cutting finding over the years is that resource efficiency was often challenging to assess rigorously because the evidence base was uneven. In many evaluations, judgments on cost efficiency, adequacy of resources or resource leveraging relied on partial information, such as expenditure rates, stakeholder perceptions, narrative descriptions of implementation progress, or isolated examples of co-financing, rather than systematic analysis linking resources used to results achieved.

Key highlights of effectiveness results by P&B policy outcomes from 2022-25

The report assess how well ILO interventions performed during the 2022–2023 and 2024–2025 biennia by looking at their effectiveness, sustainability and emerging impact. Due to the uneven distribution of reports across the different ILO policy outcomes, and limited sample size, it is structured by degree of representativeness, and results should be interpreted with this in mind.

High representativeness

Policy Outcome 3: Full and productive employment for just transitions
Policy Outcome 4: Sustainable enterprises for inclusive growth and decent work
Policy Outcome 6: Protection at work for all

Moderate representativeness

Policy Outcome 1: Strong, modernized normative action for social justice
Policy Outcome 2: Strong tripartite constituents and influential and inclusive social dialogue
Policy Outcome 7: Universal social protection

Low representativeness

Policy Outcome 5: Gender equality and equality of treatment and opportunities for all
Policy Outcome 8: Integrated policy and institutional responses for social justice through decent work
Enabler A: Enhanced knowledge, innovation, cooperation and communication to advance social justice

Read chapter 5 for more information.

Key conclusions

Strong strategic relevance and coherence: most interventions were well aligned with ILO strategic priorities (P&B outcomes, DWCP outcomes and CPOs), while also responding effectively to national priorities and constituent needs. Collaboration with stakeholders, adequacy and quality of project design, contributions to the SDGs, and alignment with UN frameworks were generally positive, though results varied across interventions.

Effectiveness was positive but uneven: Overall effectiveness was satisfactory, but performance differed considerably across projects and indicators. Delivery of outputs did not consistently translate into achievement of intended outcomes, indicating challenges in moving from activity implementation to sustainable results. The strongest areas of performance were capacity development, knowledge generation, and strategic partnerships.

Mixed performance on cross-cutting priorities: Gender responsiveness, normative work, and promotion of International Labour Standards, tripartism and social dialogue, and propoor approaches were generally well integrated, though results were not consistent across all interventions. Disability inclusion and environmental sustainability/just transition remained the weakest cross-cutting dimensions and require greater attention.

Sustainability and impact were major strengths: 75% of interventions were rated successful or highly successful in terms of sustainability and impact. Evaluations found evidence of policy influence, strategic importance, and contributions to national development outcomes. ILO expertise was widely recognized and valued by constituents and partners.
Strong sustainability was associated with stakeholder ownership, policy integration, alignment with national priorities, continued capacity development, and embedding results within existing systems.

Efficiency remains the principal area for improvement: Efficiency showed the greatest variability across the portfolio. While implementation management, internal coordination, and cost-efficiency were generally strong, weaknesses persisted in results-based management, monitoring systems, and reporting mechanisms. Challenges related to the adequacy and timeliness of human and financial resources were common. Resource mobilization and leveraging emerged as recurring weaknesses.

Read chapter chapter 6 for more information

Pointers for the way forward

The quality of project design continues to shape performance across multiple criteria. Future interventions should ensure that objectives, implementation approaches, geographic scope, implementation timeframes and resource requirements are realistically aligned from the outset. Particular attention should be given to the development of robust theories of change, clear implementation pathways, stakeholder validation processes and realistic assumptions regarding institutional capacities and contextual risks.

Positive, although mixed, results were observed regarding collaboration under common UN frameworks and contributions to the Sustainable Development Goals. Future interventions should continue to identify opportunities for collaboration with UN partners and position decent work outcomes within broader national and international development agendas, particularly where this can strengthen policy coherence, resource mobilisation and sustainability.

Stakeholder ownership emerged as a key contributor to sustainability across the portfolio. Future interventions should strengthen engagement of governments, employers’ and workers’ organisations throughout the project cycle and ensure that social dialogue mechanisms contribute to project governance, decision-making and follow-up of results.

Operational support modalities, including capacity development, knowledge generation and strategic partnerships, remain among the ILO’s strongest comparative advantages. Future programming should continue to build on these strengths while strengthening links between operational support, policy influence and institutional change. Greater attention should be given to how knowledge products, capacity-building activities and pilot interventions contribute to longer-term reforms and implementation processes.

Disability inclusion and environmental sustainability for a just transition continue to receive less systematic attention than other cross-cutting priorities. Future interventions should integrate these dimensions more explicitly through dedicated objectives, indicators, budgets and monitoring requirements. Project design should make greater use of existing ILO guidance, tools and proven approaches, while strengthening partnerships with specialised organisations and institutions. Where relevant, interventions should include disability-disaggregated indicators, accessibility measures, environmental sustainability considerations and just transition pathways from the design stage onwards.

Strong sustainability performance was observed when results became embedded within national systems, institutional mandates, governance structures and routine operational processes. Future interventions should define clear institutional pathways for the continuation of project results, including responsibilities for financing, coordination, capacity maintenance and operational management beyond project completion.

Read chapter chapter 6 for more information
Weaknesses in results-based management, monitoring systems and reporting mechanisms continued to affect effectiveness, sustainability and efficiency. Future interventions should strengthen results frameworks and monitoring systems to improve the measurement of outcome-level change, including behavioural, institutional and policy-level results, and make more systematic use of monitoring information for adaptive management, learning and decision-making.

Resource efficiency is challenging to assess consistently across interventions. Future monitoring and reporting systems should strengthen the collection of information on resource adequacy, timeliness of resource allocation, staffing capacity, leveraged resources and value for money. More systematic documentation of these dimensions would strengthen learning and support more robust assessments of efficiency of ILO development cooperation projects.

Resource efficiency was strongest when projects combined realistic planning, timely access to resources, adaptive management, strategic partnerships and adequate implementation capacity. Future interventions should strengthen resource planning during project design and regularly review the alignment between project ambitions, staffing arrangements, technical capacity and available budgets throughout implementation.

Field-level presence, technical expertise and active engagement by country offices were frequently associated with stronger implementation performance. Future interventions should ensure that staffing arrangements are commensurate with project scope and complexity, particularly in multi-country, institution-building and partnership-intensive interventions.

Resource mobilisation was a recurring area of weakness across the portfolio. Projects should more systematically identify opportunities for co-financing, government contributions, partnerships and follow-on investments during both design and implementation. Stronger linkages between project objectives, national policy processes, UN cooperation frameworks and larger financing mechanisms may help expand the scale, sustainability and reach of project results.