M&E in the GEF

1. M&E in the GEF KseniyaTemnenko Knowledge Management Officer Extended Constituency Workshop 11 – 13 October 2011 Tashkent, Uzbekistan

2. Overview • Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and results-based management (RBM) in GEF-5 • M&E policy for GEF-5 • M&E Minimum Requirements • Involvement of focal points • Evaluation planning for GEF-5 • ASK ME database • Climate-Eval: community of practice

3. RBM, Monitoring & Evaluation • 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”

4. M&E in the GEF 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.

5. New M&E Policy (Nov 2010): What’s New? • Reference to GEF Results-based Management (RBM) • Strengthened knowledge sharing and learning • Clarification of roles and responsibilities • Stronger role for GEF Operational Focal Points in M&E • Inclusion of programs and jointly implemented projects • Baseline data for M&E to be established by CEO endorsement • New Minimum Requirement on engagement of GEF Operational Focal Points in project and program M&E activities

6. GEF Strategic Goals Institutional Level (top-down) GEB Impacts Outcomes Outputs Focal Area Goal Focal Area Objectives Operating Level (bottom-up) Project Objectives RBM Framework for the GEF

7. Project and Program Design Implementation Evaluation LFA/Results framework M&E Plan Monitoring of progress; midpoint course correction as needed Terminal Evaluations Lessons Learned Management, monitoring, and learning Lessons learned; Good practices RBM and Tracking Results Adapted from the World Bank’s Results Focus in Country Assistance Strategies, July 2005, p. 13

8. Knowledge Sharing • 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

9. M&E Reporting in the GEF

10. M&E Levels and Responsible Agencies

11. Follow up to Evaluations • 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) • In the case of Country Portfolio Evaluations countries have the opportunity to provide their perspective to Council as well

12. M&E: Minimum Requirement 1 Design of M&E Plans Concrete and fully budgeted M&E plan by CEO endorsement for FSP and CEO approval for MSP. Project logical frameworks should align with GEF focal area results frameworks. M&E Plan should include: • SMART indicators • Baseline data for M&E by CEO endorsement • Mid Term Reviews (where required or foreseen) and Terminal Evaluations included in plan • Organizational set up and budget for M&E

13. M&E: Minimum Requirement 2 Implementation of M&E Plans Project/program monitoring and supervision will include execution of the M&E plan: • Use of SMART indicators for process and implementation • Use of SMART indicators for results • Baseline for the project is fully established and data are compiled to review progress • Organizational set up for M&E is operational and its budget is spent as planned

14. M&E: Minimum Requirement 3 Project/Program Evaluations: • All full sized projects and programs will be evaluated at the end of implementation • Evaluations should: • Be independent of project management or reviewed by GEF Agency evaluation unit • Apply evaluation norms and standards of the GEF Agency • Assess, as a minimum, outputs and outcomes, likelihood of sustainability, compliance with Minimum Requirements 1 & 2 • Contain basic project data and lessons on the evaluation itself (including TORs) • Should be sent to GEF EO within 12 months of completion of project/program Guidelines for evaluating MSPs/EAs will be developed

15. M&E: New Minimum Requirement 4 Engagement of Operational Focal Points • M&E plans should include how OFPs will be engaged • OFPs to be informed on M&E activities, including Mid Term Reviews and Terminal Evaluations, receiving drafts for comments and final reports • OFPs 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

16. Role of GEF Focal Points in M&E • 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

17. Support to GEF focal points • GEF-5 cross-cutting capacity development strategy: • Fifth component: enhancing capacities to monitor and evaluate environmental impacts and trends. This should be identified as a priority in the NCSA capacity development action plan • The capacity development plan should be formulated as a medium size project, or it should be 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 from $44m set-aside for capacity development

18. GEF EO vision for GEF-5 • 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

19. OPS5 will include: • Verification and ratings of outcome and progress toward impact • Coverage of the reform process: GEF project cycle and modalities, direct access, STAR, paragraph 28 • Increased attention to the catalytic role of the GEF • Trends in ownership and country drivenness • Trends in global environmental problems and relevance of the GEF to the conventions • More in-depth look at the focal area strategies, including sustainable forestry management • Better understanding of the longer term impact of the GEF

20. Further issues for OPS5 • Project cycle issues: efficiency of decision making in the GEF? • SIDS issues? • Stakeholder consultations: are the ECW developing in a continuous consultation process? • What more would be needed? • Is e-survey sufficient? • Follow-up from OPS4 – governance, • Global and regional projects

21. GEF Portfolio in Central Asia Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Kyrgyzstan, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan

22. Distribution of National Level Projects (n = 185)

23. GEF Grant and Cofinancing – Central Asia

24. Biodiversity in the GEF • Climate Change in the GEF

25. Climate-Eval: introduction • Community of practice on evaluation of climate change and development • Sharing best practices on climate change and development evaluation • 500+ members • Online tools for participation: • Website: www.climate-eval.org • Linkedin Group • Social media • News letters • Blog (soon!)

26. Climate-Eval: activities • 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

27. Questions for discussion • Knowledge Sharing of Evaluations: • Are you receiving GEF Evaluations? • What format of communication of evaluation findings is the most useful for your work?

28. Thank you www.gefeo.org 28