UNDP and the Evolving GEF

1. GEF UNDP and the Evolving GEF A Presentation to the Environment and Energy Practice workshop Almaty –Kazakhstan, October 6-9, 2004

2. The Global Environment Facility - GEF • The GEF was established in 1991 to forge international cooperation and finance actions to address critical threats to the global environment; • It was conceived as a partnership among three implementing agencies: World bank, UNDP and UNEP; • GEF funding is to meet the agreed incremental costs of measures to achieve agreed global environmental benefits.

3. CONVENTIONS COUNCIL ASSEMBLY 32 Members : All 173 Provides Guidance on Policy & Programme Issues 18 Recipient Participants 14 Donor GEF Governance Structure • GEF Council meets every 6 months to review and approve all projects, Work Programmes, Business Plans, policies. • GEF Assembly meets every 4 years to review general policies,operations, and amendments to the GEF Instrument. • GEF Secretariat supports GEF Council and prepares work program. 7

4. History of the GEF – A Timeline • GEF Pilot Phase • 1991-1994 -- $1 Billion US Dollars • Replenishment: • 1995-1998 -- $2.2 Billion US Dollars • 1999-2001 -- $2.8 Billion US Dollars • 2002-2005 -- $2.95 Billion US Dollars World Bank is the Trustee of the GEF Trust Fund

5. UNDP-GEF Project Approval FY92-FY04

6. FY03-FY04 Project Approval

7. UNDP/GEF Delivery Rates by Region2000, 2001, 2002, 2003

8. Recent policy changes • The GEF Council has developed a number of additional policies and procedural requirements to access GEF resources over the past five years: • 2 new focal areas • 5 new Operational programmes • 22 new Strategic Priorities • 7 new Executing Agencies (AfDB, AsDB, EBRD, IADB, FAO, IFAD, UNIDO) • Pipeline entry (project concept approval) • New co-financing definitions and increased ratios, especially in Climate Change • Performance indicators • IA/EA Institutional Performance Assessment • SMPR • Resource Allocation Framework – a controversial concept still under discussion

9. Adapting to the Evolving GEF • Enhancing quality of oversight and country level services; and demonstrating impact; • Increasing programming delivery. • Reducing project cycle duration and streamlining pipeline management efficient; • Strengthening mainstreaming of global environment concerns into UNDP national policy dialogue;

10. Key UNDP/GEF Interventions • Objective 1: Leverage UNDP’s main comparative advantage for global environment management – the country office network • Objective 2: Complete Phase 2 of UNDP/GEF’s decentralization process • Objective 3: Improve implementation efficiency and performance of the UNDP/GEF portfolio • Objective 4: Improve mainstreaming of global environment management

11. Objective 1: Leverage UNDP’s Country Office Network • Clarify work distribution between UNDP/GEF and COs: • Capacity development of country offices through targeted regional training and establishment of a conducive incentive framework • Harmonization and simplification of the UNDP/GEF project cycle • Knowledge products (resource kits, databases) and advanced information-sharing tools (Intranet)

12. Country Offices lead on: UNDP-GEF leads on: Identification and Mainstreaming ·Programming (project identification, prioritization, initial filtering of project ideas before forwarding to RCU) based on country needs, priorities, action plans, and in line with CPAP. ·Joint programming with TRAC and other funds ·Ensuring GEF project findings are integrated in national policy ·Clearance on UNDP-GEF pipeline ·Sharing mainstreaming experiences across regions ·Guidance on thematic links between GEF strategic priorities and UNDP practice areas (Programming Kits) ·Simplification and harmonization of UNDP-GEF documents Formulation ·Early dialogue with in-country partners/donors ·Cofinancing arrangements/ commitments ·Managing the formulation process (briefing of consultants on country needs, priorities, institutional context and capacities, UNDP-GEF documentation requirements, admin/ operational aspects) ·Stakeholder participation in formulation ·Definition of optimal execution/ implementation arrangements, including assessment of institutional capacities ·Verifying consistency with GEF eligibility requirements ·Translating GEF policy guidance and application of eligibility criteria · Managing the formulation process (sourcing and technical briefing and guidance of consultants as necessary) ·Coordinating with other GEF IAs and ExAs (in countries where IA and ExA representatives are country-based, country offices are also responsible for maintaining such a dialogue). ·Assessing technical soundness of the project formulator’s work ·Clearance for submission to the GEF Secretariat Implementation and evaluation ·Briefing at inception workshop ·Work planning and budgeting ·Day-to-day dialogue with stakeholders ·Troubleshooting & early warning when corrective measures are needed as per project risk management system ·M&E responsibilities, in addition to UNDP procedures, including PIR and project risk management system ·Demonstrating the impacts of UNDP-GEF activities in furthering UNDP’s mandate through other practice areas such as poverty reduction, governance. ·Briefing at inception workshop (in support to COs) ·Reformulation of project outputs and outcomes in collaboration with country offices and project teams when deemed necessary ·Developing knowledge products and services based on lessons from the portfolio and sharing across regions ·Demonstrating the impact of UNDP-GEF activities in advancing towards agreed GEF and global environmental convention objectives

13. Past Efforts to Develop Country Office Capacities Mix of standardized and tailor-made initiatives. Standardized initiatives included: • Training of environment focal points and government counterparts at UNDP-GEF headquarters (late 1990s). (Almost 90 people trained through a series of 3 workshops on GEF mandate, objectives, eligibility criteria, and potential for complementarity with national development objectives). • Logical framework workshops (Mexico and Berlin, late 1990s).

14. Past Efforts to Develop Country Office Capacities Tailor-made approaches included: • Visits by RCs to country offices in their regions. • Assistance to country offices in hiring of focal points. • RBA: survey of country office staff dedicated to GEF matters (can now serve as a baseline to monitor change). • Attachment of key UNDP/GEF CO Focal Points to UNDP/GEF Unit for 1 to 3 months Mixed approaches included: • Country dialogue workshops (ongoing).

15. Deepening Past Approaches • Create a GEF section in UNDP intranetenabling quick access to GEF secretariat website, UNDP-GEF programming manual, PIMS, UNDP-GEF knowledge management efforts, and UNDP-GEF contacts. • Simplification and harmonization (AWP, PA rather than PDF A, etc.) • Phase approach providing customized services to COs

17. Objective 2: Decentralization Effective decentralization must be accompanied by: • New Organizational Structure • Six RCUs • New Policies • Financial delegation • Strategic planning by region • New Skills • Partnerships • New hires to reduce fragmentation

18. UNDP/GEF Organigramme

19. Objective 3: Improve implementation efficiency and performance of the UNDP/GEF portfolio Need to improve the implementation efficiency and performance of the UNDP/GEF portfolio by: • Reducing project formulation delays • Demonstrating Impact

20. Reasons for Project Formulation Delays Discussion on delays at key stages in project cycle: • From pipeline to GEF Council approval (WP) • From GEF Council approval for project initiation • From initiation to completion

23. Average Delay Between GEF Approval and Project Signature for All Regions

24. Key interventions to reduce project management cycle delays • Streamlined project formulation (simplified PDF A); • Upstream co-financing mobilization; • Strengthen cost-recovery; • Enhance pipeline management.

25. Pipeline Management and GEF Financial Resources • There is a pattern of high project approval levels during the first two years of a GEF funding phase and then of a steady decline as funding is exhausted. • According to the latest GEF financial projections, $1.556 billion in GEF resources are available for the remaining 2 years of GEF-3. • This financial situation could drastically change arrears occur. For instance, arrears of approximately 10% of total GEF-3 commitments would wipe-out 40% of resources earmarked for FY 06.

26. Pipeline Management Guidance • Avoid slippage of projects that are slated for approval in FY 05 • Focus on high-quality pipeline • Conduct a forceful pipeline clean up in FY05 • Adjust pipeline of new EU countries

27. Demonstrating Impact • Leverage Atlas and PIMS III to monitor delivery and strengthen result reporting and analysis; • Leverage Atlas for project risk management system • Project performance indicators • Partnership with BOM to include program management indicators in country office score cards.

28. Objective 5: Mainstreaming Global Environment “UNDP leverages its core competences in integrated policy design and implementation to mainstream environment into national policies.” MMB, CSD-12

29. Mainstreaming levers • Rationalization of Enabling Activities (NCSA, NAPA, etc) • Incorporation of GEF objectives into CP and CPAP • Cross-sectoral and cross-unit cooperation (Energy Unit and GEF on national energy strategies, BCPR and adaptation, etc.)