Transcript English - Global Environment Facility

M&E in the GEF
Aaron Zazueta
Chief Evaluation Officer
 RBM, Monitoring & Evaluation
 M&E in the GEF
 M&E levels and responsible Agencies
 M&E Policy
 Minimum requirements
 Role of the Focal Points
 Fifth Overall Performance Study (OPS5)
 Objective of the Overall Performance Studies
 Evaluation streams & OPS5
 Theory of Change
 Content of OPS5 reports
 Knowledge Sharing and Community of Practice
 Questions & Answers
2
 Result based management - setting goals and objectives,
monitoring, learning and decision making
 Evaluation is a “reality check” on RBM
 RBM, especially monitoring, tell whether the organization is
“on track”
 Evaluation could tell whether the organization is “on the
right track”
3
Two overarching objectives
 Promote accountability for the achievement of GEF
objectives through the assessment of results, effectiveness,
processes, and performance of the partners involved in GEF
activities
 Promote learning, feedback, and knowledge sharing on
results and lessons learned among the GEF and its partners
as a basis for decision making on policies, strategies, program
management, programs, and projects; and to improve
knowledge and performance
4
Enabling
Environment
M&E Policy
COUNCIL
Oversight
GEF
Evaluation
Office
GEF
Evaluation
Office,
Evaluation
Partners
Advice
STAP
GEF
Secretariat,
GEF
Agencies
Partner
Countries,
NGOs, Private
Sector,
Communities
5
 Design of M&E Plans
 Completed and fully budgeted M&E plans by CEO
endorsement for FSPs, and CEO approval for MSPs
 Project log frames should align with GEF Focal Area result
frameworks contained in the GEF-5 RBM
 Implementation of M&E Plans
 Project/program monitoring and supervision will include
execution of the M&E plan
 Project/Program Evaluations
 All FSPs and MSPs will be evaluated
 Reports should be sent to the GEF EO within 12 months
of project completion
 Engagement of Operational Focal Points
 M&E plans should explain how GEF OFPs will be engaged
in M&E activities
6
Engagement of Operational Focal Points
 M&E plans should include how OFPs will be
engaged
 OFPs will be informed on M&E activities, including
Mid-Term Reviews and Terminal Evaluations,
receiving drafts for comments and final reports
 OFPs will be invited to contribute to the
management response (where applicable)
 GEF Agencies keep track of the application of this
requirement in their GEF financed projects and
programs
7
 Keep track of GEF support at the national level
 Keep stakeholders informed and consulted in
plans, implementation and results of GEF activities
in the country
 Disseminate M&E information, promoting use of
evaluation recommendations and lessons learned
 Assist the Evaluation Office, as the first point of
entry into a country




Identify major relevant stakeholders
Coordinate meetings
Assist with agendas
Coordinate country responses to these evaluations
8
 Fifth component: enhancing capacities to
monitor and evaluate environmental impacts
and trends (should be identified as a priority in
the NCSA capacity development action plan)
 Capacity development plan should be
• Formulated as a Medium-Size Project
• Or integrated into a broader proposal that would be
formulated as MSP or FSP (if MSP it should have 1:1
cofunding)
 Development of regional partnerships could be
considered
 Funding available from $44m set-aside for
capacity development
9
 A management response is required for all
evaluation reports presented to the GEF Council by
the GEF EO
 GEF Council takes into account both the evaluation
and the management response when taking a
decision
 GEF EO reports on implementation of decisions
annually (Management Action Record)
 For Country Portfolio Evaluations countries have
the opportunity to provide their perspective to
Council as well
10
Fifth Overall Performance Study
(OPS5)
11
To assess the extent to which the GEF is achieving
its objectives
 As laid down in the GEF Instrument and reviews by the
Assembly
 As developed and adopted by the GEF Council in
operational policies and programs for GEF financed
activities
 And to identify potential improvements
12
 Consolidation and strengthening of the four streams of
evaluative evidence
 Country Portfolio Evaluations: up to 15 during GEF-5
 Impact Evaluations: International Waters, Climate Change and
other focal areas
 Performance Evaluations: APR continued and strengthened as well
as independent process reviews
 Thematic Evaluations: focal area strategies and adaptation
 Major element of OPS5 will be a meta-evaluation
13
 Foundational
 Support for the creation of an environment that enables
necessary changes to take place
 And…require constant attention and adjustment
 Demonstration
 Testing of approaches that are intended to lead to GEBs if
adopted on a broader scale
 Investment
 Broader implementation of results of foundational and
demonstration activities
Generic GEF Theory of Change
FOUNDATIONAL
ELEMENTS
DEMONSTRATION
ELEMENTS
INVESTMENT ELEMENTS
SCALE
GOVERNANCE
FRAMEWORK
Mainstreaming
IMPLEMENTING STRATEGIES
Replication
Scaling-up
Market change
Policy, legal
& regulatory
frameworks
Administrative
reforms
Technologies
&
approaches
Organizational
structures &
arrangements
KNOWLEDGE &
INFORMATION
Information
-sharing &
access
Awarenessraising
Financial
mechanisms
for adoption &
sustainability
BEHAVIORAL CHANGE
 ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE
 SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE
 ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND
•Promoting champions
•Building on promising initiatives
•Raising profile of initiatives
•Removal of barriers
•Innovation
Knowledge
generation
INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT
INTERMEDIATE STATES
IMPACT
Adaptive management /
Learning
 Three quality assurance advisors
 Recognized experts from developed, newly emerging, and
developing nations
 Ongoing advice and comments to the replenishment group
 Reference group
 Formed by staff from the GEF Agencies independent evaluation
offices
 To provide peer reviews of sub-studies and other deliverables
 Will provide time to allow for meaningful reviews
16
First report: end of 2012
 A meta-evaluation approach, drawing on existing GEF
evaluations
Final report: end of 2013 or early 2014
 Final report will be tackled trough separate evaluation
studies
17








Relevance of GEF to conventions guidance
Ratings on outcomes and sustainability of finished projects
Ratings of progress toward impact of finished projects
Trends in catalytic role of GEF (foundation, demonstration
and/or investment projects)
Trends in ownership and country drivenness
Better understanding of GEF longer term impact
Trends in performance issues such as cofunding,
management costs, quality at entry and supervision
Trends in the implementation and achievements of the focal
areas of the GEF
18
 Trends in global environmental problems and the relevance of GEF -will include the emergence of new financing
 A more in-depth look at focal area strategies and at the existing impact
evidence
 Coverage of the reform process: GEF project cycle and modalities,
direct access, STAR, Paragraph 28
 Governance of the GEF, donor performance and resources mobilization
 The role of the private sector and civil society
 Cross-cutting policies: gender, participation, safegurads, and knowledge
sharing
 Update of the SGP evaluation (since 2009)
 The role of STAP
19
 OPS5 audience includes




replenishment participants
GEF Council
Assembly
Through the Assembly the members of GEF
 Findings will be shared with other GEF parties





GEF Secretariat
GEF Agencies
STAP
NGO Network
Project proponents and others
20
 M&E contributes to knowledge building and
organizational improvement
 Findings and lessons should be accessible to target
audiences in a user-friendly way
 Evaluation reports should be subject to a dynamic
dissemination strategy
 Knowledge sharing enables partners to capitalize on
lessons learned from experiences
 Purpose of KM in the GEF
 Promotion of a culture of learning
 Application of lessons learned
 Feedback to new activities
21
 Community of practice on evaluation of climate
change and development
 Sharing best practices on climate change and
development evaluation
 700+ members
 Online tools for participation





Website: www.climate-eval.org
Linkedin Group
Social media
News letters
Blog
22
 International Conference in Alexandria in 2008
 World Bank publication (book)

Evaluating Climate Change and Development (van den Berg and
Feinstein, 2009)
 Electronic library (400+ reports)
 Webinars
 Studies
 Meta-Evaluation of Mitigation Studies
 Adaptation Framework for M&E
 3 more underway
 Partnership – SEA Change , IDEAS
 Supporters

SIDA, FOEN, GEFEO
23
Thank you
www.gefeo.org
24