Click to edit Master title style

1. Click to edit Master title style Click to edit Master subtitle style Overview of Policies & Procedures in GEF 4 Sub-regional Workshop for GEF Focal Points in the Caribbean Nassau, Bahamas, 9-11 October 2007

2. Structure of this Presentation • GEF History and Structure • CEO’s Reform Agenda in GEF 4 • Update on GEF Policies and Procedures • Resource Allocation Framework • Comparative Advantage of Agencies • Project Cycle

3. I. GEF History and Structure

4. Origin of the GEF • Mechanism for financing “incremental costs” of new “global environment” actions by developing countries • Linked to negotiation process and based on philosophy of Convention on Biological Diversity and U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change • Initially focused on biodiversity, climate change and shared (“international”) water bodies • Extended in 2002 to land degradation and POPs

5. Financial History of the GEF • GEF Pilot Phase • 1991-1994 -- $1 Billion US Dollars • Replenishments • 1995-1998 – $2.2 Billion US Dollars • 1999-2001 – $2.8 Billion US Dollars • 2002-2005 – $2.9 Billion US Dollars • 2006-2010 – $3.1 Billion US Dollars World Bank is the Trustee of the GEF Trust Fund

6. GEF Portfolio as of June 2007, in US$ millions TOTAL GEF GRANTS: $ 6,828.74 TOTAL CO-FINANCING: $25,081.32 TOTAL $31,165.63

7. GEF Governance Framework Strategic Guidance Operations Action STAP • GEF Agencies • UNDP • UNEP • World Bank • ADB • AFDB • EBRD • FAO • IADB • IFAD • UNIDO GEF Assembly Countries: Political FPs Projects Countries: Operational FPs, Convention FPs, other gov’t agencies, civil society GEF Council Countries: Council Members/ Constituencies GEF Secretariat Conventions Countries: Convention FPs Evaluation Office

8. Implementing Agencies: UNDP UNEP World Bank broad primary roles identified in the GEF Instrument Executing Agencies: FAO UNIDO IFAD ADB AFDB EBRD IDB granted access to GEF resources and assigned more definite roles based on specific business needs of the GEF GEF Implementing and Executing Agencies

9. II. CEO’s Reform Agenda

10. New Vision for the GEF • Strategic • Innovative • Equitable • Accessible • Focused

11. 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 submitted revised strategies for review and approval at June 2007 Council

12. GEF will be Strategic (continued) • Promote programmatic approach • Move away from project driven approach • Develop and apply indicators of outcomes and impacts

13. 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

14. 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

15. GEF will be Accessible • Engage in direct and transparent dialogue with countries to ensure that new policies and procedures are understood • Enhance GEF’s corporate image and public communications • Improve data management system and website

16. 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

17. III. Update on GEF Policies and Procedures • Resource Allocation Framework • Comparative Advantages of Agencies • Project Cycle

18. Resource Allocation Framework • New system to allocate scarce GEF resources to all eligible countries • Allocations are based on: • Global Environmental Benefits • Country level Performance

19. Resource Allocation Framework(continued) • Provides predictability and transparency to countries • Applies to Biodiversity and Climate Change focal areas in GEF4

20. Allocations under the RAF In the Biodiversity and Climate Change focal areas: • Countries receive Individual Allocations OR • Countries have joint access to Group resources

21. Allocations under the RAF • Initial Allocations are for the duration of GEF4 (2006-2010) • Only 50% of Allocation can be approved in first 2 years (2006-2008) • Allocations will be adjusted after July 2008

22. 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

23. 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

24. Comparative Advantages: 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

25. Comparative Advantages: 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 GEF’s capacity to mobilize financial and technical resources and co-financing for its projects

26. Comparative Advantages: Assessment Comparative advantages assessed based on: • Institutional role and core functions as described in: • official mandate • mission statement • policies approved by its governing body • The agency’s actual capacity, expertise and experience • medium-term strategic plan • portfolio of completed and ongoing projects • country presence

27. Comparative Advantage of GEF Agencies • GEF agencies are requested to focus their involvement in GEF project activities within their respective comparative advantages • Secretariat, in agreement with country, assesses comparative advantage of GEF agency proposed to manage a project during the PIF review. • Partnerships encouraged for integrated projects with components where the expertise and experience of a GEF agency is lacking or weak. • clear complementary roles to be established • Criteria and description of comparative advantages to be regularly reviewed by Council • analysis of additional information and assessments of agency and project performance • Take into account changes in an agency’s mandate or the conclusions of the UN reform process.

28. Revised GEF Project Cycle: Objectives Objectives of revised new project cycle: • Reduction of processing time of project proposals from identification to start of implementation to 22 months • Greater upstream strategic programming of GEF resources • Simplified GEF process and transparency in decision making • Enhanced monitoring for results

29. Simplified GEF Project Approval Process Main Features: • Consolidation of steps in project cycle • Reduction in documentation requirements

30. GEF Project Cycle: Stages • National Operational Focal Point endorses project idea • GEF Agencies and Countries work together on three major phases: • Project preparation • Project approval and implementation • Project closing and evaluation

31. Project Cycle: Full Size Projects Develop concept Project Identification Form (PIF) Option to request Project Preparation Grant (PPG) Final evaluation CEO Clearance of PIF (and PPG) Project impacts continue after completion of GEF funding Implement, monitor and evaluate project ‘Work Program’ Inclusion - Council reviews overall pipeline coherence CEO Endorsement 4 Week Council Review of Project Document Prepare project proposal

32. Approval of Full Size Projects • PIFs cleared by CEO • Cleared PIFs included in work program for approval by Council • Fully prepared project documents circulated to Council for a 4 week review period prior to CEO endorsement

33. Project Cycle: Medium Size Projects Develop concept Project Identification Form (PIF) Option to request Project Preparation Grant (PPG) Final evaluation Project impacts continue after completion of GEF funding Implement, monitor and evaluate Project CEO Approval of PIF (and PPG) CEO Endorsement 2 Week Council review of Project Document Prepare project proposal

34. Approval of Medium Size Projects and Enabling Activities Medium Size Projects • PIFs approved by CEO for further preparation • Fully prepared project documents circulated to Council for 2 week comment period prior to CEO endorsement. Enabling Activities • PIFs approved by CEO for further preparation • Fully prepared projects documents endorsed by CEO and documents posted on the web site.

35. GEF Project Cycle: Project Identification & Preparation • Project Identification Form (PIF) • Provides key information on project idea and best estimate of project cost • Submitted on a rolling basis • Accompanied by Focal Point endorsement • Project Preparation Grant (PPG) • Available to Approved PIFs • Grant amount based on estimate of project preparation costs and deducted from total project cost • Approved on a rolling basis • PIF and PPG can be submitted together

36. GEF Project Cycle There are two GEF review points in the project cycle: • Project Concept Review and Work Program Inclusion: • Project Identification Form (PIF) for concept review and approval by CEO • Work Program Document describes overall programmatic coherence of GEF pipeline - focuses on overall policy and strategic issues • CEO endorsement: Fully prepared projects submitted for CEO endorsement before approval by Agencies

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

38. Project Review Criteria continued 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 • Project preparation grant status report

39. 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

40. Role of Countries • Countries are advised to: • Identify national priorities for GEF funding • Develop comprehensive and coherent GEF strategy in consultation with key stakeholders • Integrate GEF priorities within broader national environment and sustainable development frameworks

41. Role of Countries (continued) • Dialogue with GEF Secretariat to discuss proposed project concepts and approach • OFP endorses projects for GEF funding after proper consultation process • Begin project development and implementation in partnership with appropriate GEF Agencies