E-PASS Inception Project Management and Oversight by Midori Panxton

1. Empowered lives.
Resilient nations.
Project Cycle and
Monitoring & Evaluation
Midori Paxton
Regional Technical Adviser, Ecosystems and Biodiversity
E-PASS Project Inception Workshop
Bogor, Indonesia, November 19-20, 2015

2. Outline
1. Global Environmental Facility
2. Project Implementation
Responsibilities and Project Cycle
3. Adaptive Management
4. Reporting
5. Risk Management

3. What is GEF?
 Financial mechanism for international
conventions: CBD, UNFCCC, UNCCD,
Stockholm Convention on POPs
 Mechanism for financing
“incremental costs” of new “global
environment” actions by developing
countries ;
 Trust fund established in 1991
 Invested $ 31.5 biil, leveraging $ 65
bil. In co-financing, for >3,900
projects in 165 developing countries
(29% BD)
 UNDP is a GEF implementing agency

4. UNDP/GEF project implementation responsibilities
Formal
delegation of
authority to
implement the
GEF project
M&E
responsibilitie
s
Reporting
responsibi-
lities
GEF Secretariat (DC)
UNDP/EEG (NY)
UNDP Country Office
– Myanmar
OFP and Government
Executing Agency
PSC PMO
UNDP/EEG Regional
Center - Bangkok

5. Project Implementation Cycle
Project
Approval
DOA and
ProDoc
signature
Project staff
recruitment
Inception
Workshop /
Inception
ReportMid-term
Review
TT
Terminal
Evaluation,
TT
Project
Closure
LPAC
GEFGEF
No no-cost
extension !

6. Adaptive Management

7. ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT
What is it?
Project is adaptive when it anticipates challenges and
responds effectively
• Focus on “results”:
– Progress towards impact indicators
– Navigate towards the targets under
changing environment
• The “process” should change to take account of:
– New risks or change in risk rating
– Monitoring results (current strategy not working)
– Situation changes
– New opportunities

8. ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT
What changes are allowed?
• Objective level:
– Clearance from GEF in Washington D.C.
– Revised Project Document – very difficult process
– It is basically a new project – so not recommended, as you will need to
resubmit
• Outcome level:
– Clearance from UNDP-GEF, reported to GEF
– Revised Project Document
– Not recommended , resubmission might be necessary
• Output/Activity level:
– Clearance from PSC and UNDP-CO, reported to RTA
– Revised Workplan, Budget Revision
• Input level:
– Agreement with UNDP-Regional Technical Advisor
– Substantive Budget Revisions cleared by RCU

9. Reporting

10. REPORTING ON
PROGRESS
Inception report
Quarterly report
Project Implementation
Reviews /Annual Project
Report

11. Inception Report
1. Project Inception Update
2. Updated risk analysis and SESP
3. Implementation Plan
4. Workplan for 2016 - 2017
5. Terms of Reference for all the consultancies and
subcontracts to be procured in 2016 – a full and
advertisement-ready version based on the bullet
points provided in the ProDoc
6. Updated Logical Framework
7. Information on project staff, name, qualification
and contacts etc
8. Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for monitoring of
each indicator in the strategic results framework
9. Gender mainstreaming plan (indicating how
gender can be mainstreamed in each output)
10. Sustainability plan (indicating (indicating how
each output and outcome will be sustained
beyond the project period)

12. Project Implementation Report (PIR)
 Main GEF monitoring tool. Systematic portfolio-
wide data and information collected
 Annually in July
 Excel format
 Progress reporting:
DO, IP, tracking tool
 Performance rating by
PMU, EA, CO and
Regional Unit

13. Some issues to monitor in APR/PIRs
4. Partnerships: lessons learned
working with indigenous
communities, NGOs, private Sector,
Small Grants Programme
5. Gender: how being addressed in
project implementation
1. Progress: ratings. Encourage GEF OFP to rate progress as well
Toward development objective (DO) = objective + outcome level,
cumulative Implementation progress (IP) = outputs + inputs,
process + delivery , annual
2. Risk: critical risk in ATLAS + progress ratings = GEF risk system
(high, moderate, low)
3. Evaluation: how will the project address recommendations of MTE
and FE

14. Value of the APR/PIRs
1. Project implementation: remind project team what the project is
after, signals whether strategies should be adjusted, flags constraints to find
solutions
2. UNDP: identifies best practice and lessons to share across the portfolio ,
and to integrate into project design
• UNDP GEF Focal Area Performance reports + UNDP GEF Annual Performance
Report
• Information provided to UNDP communications and Executive Office for
speeches, UNDP reports to Executive Board, UNDP annual report
• UNDP Evaluation Office uses in country evaluations
3. GEF:
• Secretariat prepares Annual Monitoring Report for GEF Council, used by Focal
Areas to adjust strategies
• Evaluation Office uses for strategic evaluations

15. APR/PIRs
MOVING FROM:
• Only a donor requirement
TO:
• Tool for adaptive management +
results reporting

16. Mid-Term Review and
Terminal Evaluations
• Mandatory independent evaluation
• Organized by the UNDP CO and
facilitated by the project
• Conduct the Tracking Tools (METT
and Financial Scorecard) before
MTR and TE
• MTE and TE reports sent to GEF
M&E for review and quality control
• Prepare management response
after evaluation

17. UNDP/GEF Risk Management
System
GEF - funded projects are complex and therefore likely to face risks
and challenges

18. - SEVEN STANDARD RISK CATEGORIES – all projects should monitor
• ENVIRONMENTAL
• FINANCIAL
• OPERATIONAL
• ORGANIZATIONAL
• POLITICAL
• REGULATORY
• STRATEGIC
• OTHER

19. 1. ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS
Natural disasters

20. 2. FINANCIAL
External: interest rates, exchange rate fluctuations,
bank collapses etc;
Internal: co-funding difficulties; financial mechanisms

21. 3. OPERATIONAL RISKS
Ineffective Management
Professional negligence
Human error/incompetence
Safety being compromised
Infrastructure failure
Poor monitoring and evaluation
Slow delivery

22. 4. ORGANIZATIONAL RISKS
Institutional arrangements. Institutional / Execution
capacity. Implementation arrangements. CO
capacity

23. 5. REGULATORY RISKS:
New unexpected regulations, policies. Critical policies or legislation fails to pass or
progress in the legislative process

24. 6. POLITICAL RISKS
Government commitment
Political will
Political instability.
Change in government
Armed conflict and
instability.

25. 7. STRATEGIC RISKS
Partnerships failing to deliver

26. OTHER RISKS
- whatever doesn’t fit in the other categories -
Poaching
Encroachment
Population pressure

27. RISK CLASSIFICATION BASED ON
THE LEVEL OF CONTROL:
• Risks that arise from factors potentially under your
control (e.g. ineffective management, poor
performance by contractors)
• Risks that arise from wider policy and institutional
environment, which are only controllable by decision
makers elsewhere (e.g. poor policy environment,
institutional weakness, lack of political will)
• Risks that are essentially uncontrollable (e.g. natural
disasters, political instability, interest rates)

28. PROJECT CLASSIFICATION
ACCORDING TO RISK
•Standard
-No critical risks
-No unresolved key issues
•Potential problem project
-One or more critical risks
•Actual problem project
One or more key
unresolved issues

29. Identified Risks
1. Poaching pressure fuelled by the existence of
global illegal wildlife trade may decimate wildlife
populations (Medium)
2. Provincial and District Governments may be
reluctant to promote conservation oriented land
use with a fear of losing state
revenues(Medium)
3. International and national REDD Plus process
does not progress fast enough loses the
confidence among the project stakeholders.
(Medium)
4. Major natural disasters (earthquake, floods,
volcanic eruption etc.) inhibit the increase in
national and provincial government investment
in PA system (Medium)
5. Climate change may undermines the
conservation objectives of the Project (Low)

30. Thank you!
Empowered lives.
Resilient nations.
www.thegef.org
www.undp.org