1 / 6

Sub-Regional Workshop for GEF Focal Points Europe and CIS Dubrovnik, Croatia, 11-13 February 2009

Sub-Regional Workshop for GEF Focal Points Europe and CIS Dubrovnik, Croatia, 11-13 February 2009. SGP: Follow up to Evaluation. Main issues on SGP. SGP is successful as well as cost-effective programme when compared with other similar (Evaluation of SGP)

raven-thomas
Download Presentation

Sub-Regional Workshop for GEF Focal Points Europe and CIS Dubrovnik, Croatia, 11-13 February 2009

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Sub-Regional Workshop for GEF Focal Points Europe and CISDubrovnik, Croatia, 11-13 February 2009 SGP: Follow up to Evaluation

  2. Main issues on SGP • SGP is successful as well as cost-effective programme when compared with other similar (Evaluation of SGP) • When considering changes to SGP management, must be assessment of financial, legal and human resources implications • SGP will keep business as usual until end of GEF-4 • Some proposals will be assessed for GEF-5

  3. On “graduation” • Concept of “graduation” should be based on principle of equity in accessing core resources • “Graduation” should not indicate the end of a “graduated” country programme • Neither does it indicate de-linking “graduated” country programmes from global SGP • Rather “graduation” should indicate country is advanced in managing and sustaining SGP and fully prepared to take broader responsibilities in upgraded status • Therefore, to avoid future misunderstanding, graduation should be re-phrased as upgrading of mature SGP country programmes

  4. Categorization of Country Programmes • Would be convenient to categorize country programmes in terms of capacity and “maturity”. The following proposal will be considered: • All SIDS and LDCS no change in their access to core funding. For country programs in operation for less than 5 years, access to core fund proposed • Country programmes in operation between 5 – 15 years would gradually move towards being upgraded • Country programmees in operation for more than 15 years the most likely to be upgraded

  5. Issues for further analysis • Evaluations conducted in time to allow country programmes to be assigned to appropriate category. • Roles / responsibilities should be established for different categories of country programmes • Clear, appropriate policies required to determine access to funding, funding levels and limits under the RAF • In April 2008 Council Meeting 4 execution options for SGP were presented. To be decided which one is most preferred

  6. Looking ahead • The policy paper to be presented in the next Council Meeting will cover: • An analysis of and policies for different categories of country programmes • An assessment of alternative execution modalities and comparative capacities to provide needed services considering cost-effectiveness as well as legal, financial and human resources considerations

More Related