GEF Policies and Processes in GEF 4

1
GEF Policies and Processes in GEF 4

• Sub-regional Workshop for GEF Focal Points
• Eastern and Southern Africa
• Nairobi, 14-16 May 2007

2
Introduction

• I. New Vision for the GEF
• II. Evolving Policies and Processes
• III. Role of Countries
• IV. Comparative Advantages of GEF Agencies

3
I. New Vision for the GEF

• Strategic
• Innovative
• Equitable
• Accessible
• Focused

4
GEF will be Strategic

• Set clear priorities for the global environment
• Refocus Focal Area Strategies
• Biodiversity
• Climate Change (mitigation and adaptation)
• International Waters
• Ozone Depletion
• Land Degradation
• Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPS)
• Build synergies for cross-cutting issues
• Sustainable forest management
• Sound chemicals management
• GEF Sec will submit revised strategies for
  review and approval by June 2007 Council

5
GEF will be Strategic (continued)

• Promote programmatic approach
• Move away from project driven approach
• Develop and apply indicators of outcomes and
  impacts

6
GEF will be Innovative

• Finance cutting edge and entrepreneurial efforts
  to establish sustainable technologies
• Leverage global capital on sustainable
  development
• Reach out to private sector at the country level

7
GEF will be Equitable

• Create special mechanisms by which more
  vulnerable countries can have easier access GEF
  resources
• - Special focus on SIDS
• Ensure that a minimum level of resources are
  available to all countries under the RAF

8
GEF will be Accessible

• Engage in direct and transparent dialogue with
  countries to ensure that new policies and
  procedures are understood
• Enhance GEFs corporate image and public
  communications
• Improve data management system and website

9
GEF will be Focused

• Equalize playing field among Agencies
• Ensure all Agencies have direct access to GEF
  resources
• Engage with Agencies based on comparative
  advantage
• Simplify GEF project development process
• Redesign project cycle
• Reduce and better manage pipeline
• Target resources towards countries with greater
  potential to generate global environmental
  benefits and country performance

10
II. Evolving Policies and Processes

• Resource Allocation Framework
• Project Cycle
• Focal Area Strategies
• Small Grants Programme
• Comparative Advantage of GEF Agencies

11
Resource Allocation Framework

• New system to allocate scarce GEF resources to
  all eligible countries
• Allocations are based on
• Global Environmental Benefits
• Country level Performance

12
Resource Allocation Framework(continued)

• Provides predictability and transparency to
  countries
• Applies to Biodiversity and Climate Change focal
  areas in GEF4

13
Allocations under the RAF

• Countries receive Individual Allocations in the
  Biodiversity and Climate Change focal areas
• OR
• Countries have access to Group resources in the
  Biodiversity and Climate Change focal areas

14
Allocations under the RAF

• Initial Allocations are for the 4-year period of
  GEF4
• Only 50 of Allocation can be used for approvals
  in first 2 years of GEF4
• Allocations will be adjusted after 2 years if
  country performance and global benefits change

15
Group Allocations

• Countries in Group collectively access group
  allocation
• Average GEF4 allocation for countries in Group
• Biodiversity 1.6 million
• Climate Change 1.3 million

16
Group Allocations (continued)

• To ensure equity and predictability to all
  countries in the Group the following provisions
  apply
• One proposal up to 1 million to be reviewed
  expeditiously within national context
• Additional proposals to be reviewed in
  comparison with projects from all countries in
  the Group
• Group resources cannot be channeled to Small
  Grants Programme or Cross-cutting Capacity
  Building

17
Programming Resources under the RAF

• GEF Secretariat engages in direct dialogues with
  countries
• Countries determine national priorities and
  projects for GEF funding based on GEF guidance
• Countries discuss identified priority
  concepts/projects with appropriate GEF Agency for
  further development
• GEF Agency fees are considered part of the
  country RAF allocation and should be included in
  project grant amounts in country endorsement
  letters under the RAF

18
Managing Pipeline of Projects Under Preparation

• GEFs Goal Balance resources availability with
  demand in predictable and transparent manner
• Projects to be entered into pipeline based on
• Fit with GEF Focal Area Strategy
• National priority based on country endorsement
• Realistic project preparation timeframe
• Measurable results and global impacts

19
Managing Pipeline of Projects Under Preparation
(continued)

• Near term focus on Pipeline 2007
• Identified project priorities for preparation and
  approval in 2007
• Projects to be considered for next Pipeline after
  June 2008

20
Focal Area (FA) Strategies

• FA strategies presented to Dec 2006 Council
  considered as interim or working drafts
• Based on Council guidance, CEO to revise
  strategies while ensuring consultative process,
  has established
• 5 Technical Advisory Groups (TAGs) in each of
  the focal areas (POPs and Ozone combined).
• Coordinating Strategy Advisory Group (SAG)
• Purpose of revising FA Strategies to sharpen
  their focus and harmonize/integrate approaches in
  different FAs
• Revised FA Strategies will be presented to June
  2007 Council for review and approval.

21
Focal Area (FA) Strategies(continued)

• Interim strategies formed basis for 2007
  pipeline, whereas revised strategies will provide
  basis for 2008-2010 pipelines
• Focal Points can follow progress of this
  undertaking by visiting GEFSEC website
• http//thegef.org/Operational_Policies/Operational
  _Strategy/GEFFocalAreaStrategies.html
• Focal Points welcome to provide feedback to
  on-going work channeled through the Council
  Member in their respective constituencies

22
Proposed GEF Project Cycle

• Objectives of the proposed new project cycle
• Greater upstream strategic programming of GEF
  resources
• Reduction of project preparation time from 66 to
  22 months on average and
• Simplified GEF process and transparency in
  decision making.

23
Proposed GEF Project Cycle

• Progression from one phase to the next is through
  two discrete GEF review points
• Project Concept Review and Work Program
  Inclusion using a Project Identification Form
  (PIF) for concept review and approval by CEO
  and a Work Program Document which describes the
  overall programmatic coherence of the GEF
  pipeline of projects and focuses on policy and
  strategic issues will be submitted by CEO for
  Council consideration and
• CEO endorsement Fully prepared projects would
  be submitted for CEO endorsement before such
  projects are approved by the Agencies.

24
Proposed GEF Project Cycle

• GEF Agencies are responsible for three
• major phases
• Project preparation
• Project approval and implementation supervision
• Project closing and evaluation

25
GEF Pipeline Management

• All approved PIFs go into GEF pipeline
• Proposals in the pipeline will be processed with
  time-bound milestones
• Proposals not meeting the milestones are subject
  to cancellation policies approved by the Council.

26
Project Review Criteria

• Criteria for PIF and Work Program Inclusion
• Country eligibility
• GEF operational focal point endorsement
• Consistency with GEF strategic objectives/programs
  
• Comparative advantage of the GEF agency
  submitting the PIF
• Consistency of the GEF grant amount with
  resources available in the focal area, strategic
  objectives, strategic program, and Resource
  Allocation Framework allocations
• Estimated cost of the project and
• Milestones for further project processing.

27
Project Review Criteria

• Criteria for CEO Endorsement of Projects
• Final cost tables for project components, project
  management, consultants, and co-financing
• GEF Monitoring and Evaluation Policy provisions
• Explanation for any changes in expected global
  environmental benefits, consistency with focal
  area strategy, GEF grant amount and co-financing
  since PIF approval and
• Project preparation grant status report.

28
Country Endorsement(by Country National
Operational Focal Point)

• Endorsement is required when PIF is submitted for
  CEO approval
• Projects in the biodiversity and climate change
  focal areas should follow the endorsement rules
  of RAF (all resources requested are out of
  country/group allocations).

29
Project Identification Form (PIF)

• Submission of a PIF for CEO approval is on a
  monthly basis.
• PIF template includes key information on project
  idea and best estimate of project cost.

30
Project Preparation Grant (PPG)

• Available only for
• Approved PIFs
• After receipt of Focal Point endorsement letter
• Grant amount based on estimate of project
  preparation costs and deducted from total project
  cost
• Approved on a rolling basis

31
Country Endorsement(by Country National
Operational Focal Point)

• Endorsement required
• when PIF is submitted for CEO approval and Work
  Program inclusion.
• PIFs for Biodiversity and Climate Change
  projects need to be in line with the agreements
  reached with a country during the direct
  dialogues with GEFSEC.

32
New Guidelines for SGP

• Balancing the demands of Small Grants Programme
  (SGP) with available resources
• New guidelines developed by SGP Steering
  Committee
• Expansion of SGP to 21 additional countries
• SGP Graduation policy
• Determination of amount countries can allocate to
  Small Grants Programme

33
III. Role of Countries

• Countries should rethink their approach to GEF
• Develop comprehensive and coherent GEF strategy
  in consultation with key stakeholders
• Integrate GEF priorities with broader national
  environment and sustainable development
  frameworks
• Identify national priorities for GEF funding

34
Role of Countries (continued)

• Dialogue with GEF Secretariat to discuss proposed
  project concepts and approach
• Endorse project concepts after proper
  consultation process
• Begin project development and implementation in
  partnership with appropriate Implementing
  Agencies

35
IV. Adaptation to Climate Change

• Funds for Adaptation - only limited funds still
  available from the 230 million pledged for
  adaptation
• Features of Funds
• Strategic Priority on Adaptation (SPA) Trust Fund
• LDC Fund (UNFCCC)
• SCCF Fund (UNFCCC)
• Adaptation Fund under discussion (Kyoto Protocol)

36
Different features

• GEF TRUST FUND
• Incremental cost
• Global benefits
• RAF
• Co-financing

• New FUNDS
• Additional cost
• Sliding scale (optional)
• NO RAF
• NO Global benefits
• Different approach to co-financing

37
Piloting an Operational Approach to Adaptation
(SPA)

• Projects will Show how adaptation planning and
  assessment can be practically translated into
  projects that will provide real benefits
• Of the 50 million allocation, only 18 million
  are left for very competitive projects gt after
  an evaluation of the pilot the program will
  evolve
• Policy guidelines GEF Assistance to Address
  Adaptation
• SPA operational guidelines

38
Climate Change New fundsLDCF and SCCF focus on
development

• Least Developed Countries Fund
• implementation of NAPAs (urgent and immediate
  needs)
• Special Climate Change Fund
• (a) top priority adaptation
• Areas Water, land management, agriculture,
  health, infrastructure development, fragile
  ecosystems, integrated coastal zone management,
  disaster risk management and prevention
• gt Complementarity of the funds

39
Status of the new funds

• LDCF
• Existing resources, including pledges 115
  million
• The LDCF has supported the preparation of NAPAs
  in 44 LDCs and will support NAPA implementation
• SCCF
• Total resources, including pledges 60 million
• 34 million already programmed in projects on the
  ground, 100 million in proposals received
• gt About 90 million mobilized in the last 12
  months

40
V. Comparative Advantages of GEF Agencies

• Implementing Agencies (UNDP, UNEP and World Bank)
  
• broad primary roles identified in the GEF
  Instrument
• Executing Agencies (ADB, AfDB, EBRD, IADB, FAO,
  IFAD and UNIDO)
• granted access to GEF resources and assigned more
  definite roles based on specific business needs
  of the GEF

41
Level Playing Field

• Move towards a more level playing field among the
  GEF agencies
• Executing Agencies have direct access to GEF
  funding based on their comparative advantages.
• Comparative advantage assessed by GEF
  Secretariat, in consultation with the country,
  during the Project Concept Review.

42
Guiding criteria

• Increasing capacity of GEF to address new and
  emerging areas, and respond to country driven
  priorities and the requirements of the
  conventions
• Increasing the diversity of experience from which
  the GEF can draw on for innovative interventions
• Leveraging additional resources
• expanding the GEFs capacity to mobilize
  financial and technical resources and
  co-financing for its projects.

43
Assessment of Comparative Advantage

• Comparative advantages assessed based on
• Institutional role and core functions as
  described in
• official mandate
• mission statement
• policies approved by its governing body
• The agencys actual capacity, expertise and
  experience
• business plan
• portfolio of completed and ongoing projects
• Country Presence

44
Process

• Preliminary description of each agencys
  comparative advantage with agency input
• Description of the role of each GEF agency
• within each of the GEF focal areas
• Agency comments by April 20 and paper available
  on web by May 11.

45
Thank you