m&e in the gef
DESCRIPTION
M&E in the GEF. Neeraj Negi GEF Evaluation Office Expanded Constituency Workshop Kyiv, March 2011. 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 - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
M&E in the GEF
Neeraj Negi
GEF Evaluation Office
Expanded Constituency WorkshopKyiv, March 2011
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 Questions on NCSA evaluation Evaluation planning for GEF-5
2
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”
M&E in the GEFTwo 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
New M&E Policy (Nov 2010): What’s New?
Reference to GEF Results-based Management (RBM) Strengthened knowledge sharing and learningClarification of roles and responsibilities Stronger role for GEF Operational Focal Points in M&E Inclusion of programs and jointly implemented projectsBaseline data for M&E to be established by CEO
endorsementNew Minimum Requirement on engagement of GEF
Operational Focal Points in project and program M&E activities
5
RBM Framework for the GEF
Operating Level
(bottom-up)
Institutional Level
(top-down)
Project Objectives
Focal Area Goal
GEF Strategic
Goals
Focal Area Objectives
GEBImpacts
OutcomesOutputs
6
RBM and Tracking Results
Project and Program Design Implementation Evaluation
LFA/Results frameworkM&E Plan
Management, monitoring, and learning
Monitoring of progress; midpoint course correction as needed
Terminal EvaluationsLessons Learned
Lessons learned; Good practices
Adapted from the World Bank’s Results Focus in Country Assistance Strategies, July 2005, p. 13
7
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 strategyKnowledge 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
8
Knowledge
management is
a process for
improving
performance by
learning
Separate reporting lines for Monitoring (through Secretariat) and Evaluation (through
Evaluation Office)
9
GEF Council
Project and Program Implementation Reports Agency Portfolio Reports Project documents with M&E plans
Corporate evaluations Project and Program Independent evaluations
Project and Program evaluations
GEF Secretariat GEF
Evaluation Office Agency
evaluation units
Agency GEF coordination units
GEF projects and programs
Project and Program Implementation Reports Project and Program monitoring documentation Terminal evaluations
Annual evaluation reports Overall Performance Study (to Assembly) Annual Work Program and Budget
Annual Monitoring Report Evaluation Management Response Programming documents and indicators Results Based Management
M&E Levels and Responsible Agencies
10
Advice
Oversight
M&E Policy
GEF Evaluation
Office, Evaluation Partners
COUNCIL
Enabling Environment
STAP
GEF Evaluation
Office
GEF Secretariat,
GEF Agencies
Partner Countries,
NGOs, Private Sector,
Communities
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
11
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 SMART indicators Projects should align with GEF focal area results
frameworks 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
12
M&E: Minimum Requirement 2
Implementation of M&E Plans Project/program monitoring and supervision will include execution of the M&E plan: SMART indicators for process/implementation SMART indicators for results Baseline for the project fully established and data
compiled to review progress Organizational set up for M&E is operational and
its budget is spent as planned
13
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 M&E minimum requirements 1 & 2 Contain: data on the evaluation itself (including TORs); basic project
data, lessons Should be sent to GEF EO within 12 months of completion of
project/program
Guidelines for evaluating MSPs/EAs will be developed 14
M&E: Minimum Requirement 3
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
15
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.
16
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
17
18
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• These streams of evaluative evidence will enable
a timely OPS5 for which less additional work should be needed than for OPS4
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 GEFTrends in ownership and country drivennessTrends in global environmental problems and relevance
of the GEF to the conventionsMore in-depth look at the focal area strategies,
including sustainable forestry managementBetter understanding of the longer term impact of the
GEF19
Evaluation of National Capacity Self-Assessments (NCSAs)
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
As of August 2010: 153 NCSAs approved ($28.7 million), 119 completed (UNDP: 76%;
UNEP: 23%; WB: 1%) 23 approved second phases to implement NCSAs recommendations
(more in GEF5) Global Support Programme for NCSA (completed)
Evaluation under preparation, report expected for the November 2011 GEF Council
20
Key questions for consultation/discussion
Issues that will be tackled in the NCSA evaluation and that can be raised with us at this meeting: To what extent have NCSAs been relevant to your country’s
needs and priorities? Have they been relevant to support the implementation of conventions?
What was the process of NCSA preparation? Who participated?
What are the main achievements and results of the NCSAs? Was capacity development improved during the
implementation or NCSAs? Any specific examples? What is the sustainability of the capacity developed? Any
specific examples? Other issues to be included?
21
Thank you!
Discussion
Q&A on the new GEF M&E PolicyAny comments on the issues that will be
tackled in the NCSA evaluation? Other issues to be included?