M&E in the GEF

1. M&E in the GEF Carlo Carugi Senior Evaluation Officer Expanded Constituency Workshop Dakar, Senegal - July 2011

2. Overview • Results-based management (RBM), and Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) in GEF-5 • M&E policy for GEF-5 • M&E Minimum Requirements • Involvement of focal points • Evaluation planning for GEF-5

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 GEB Impacts Outcomes Outputs Institutional Level (top-down) 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 evaluations and performance 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. Evaluation of National Capacity Self-Assessments • Support to NCSAs was one of the approaches to implement the GEF capacity development strategy and UN conventions guidance to GEF • NCSA aimed to identify country level priorities and needs for capacity development to address global environmental issues, holistic and long-term approach, country driven and led • Evaluation is ongoing; next week the consultant will be in Dakar and Banjul; the report expected for the November 2011 GEF Council

21. Country Portfolio Evaluations • Country Portfolio Evaluations have been conducted in Sub-Saharan Africa in 2007-2008 • In this GEF constituency: Benin (report n° 41) • Next CPEs in Sub-Saharan Africa: 4 foreseen in 2013, in time for inclusion in OPS5 • Country selection is not finalized yet; one country will be chosen in this region. Candidates include: - Burkina Faso - Guinea Bissau - Mali - Mauritania - Senegal

22. Discussion • Q&A on the new GEF M&E Policy • Any other Q&A Thank you!